    [Constitution, Jefferson's Manual, and the Rules of the House of Representatives, 112th Congress]
    [112nd Congress]
    [House Document 111-157]
    [Rules of the House of Representatives]
    [Pages 331-999]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

    [[Page 331]]

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

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

    [[Page 332]]

    [[Page 333]]

                      RULES OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

        RULES OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, WITH NOTES AND ANNOTATIONS

                                   __________

                                     Rule I

    Approval of the Journal
                                  the speaker

    621. Journal; Speaker's approval.

      1. The Speaker shall take the Chair on every legislative day precisely
    at the hour to which the House last adjourned and immediately call the
    House to order.  Having
    examined and approved the Journal of the last day's proceedings, the
    Speaker shall announce to the House 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.

    [[Page 334]]

      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, 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). A gender-based reference was eliminated in
    the 111th Congress (sec. 2(l), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, p. _).

      The hour of meeting is fixed by standing order, and was traditionally
    set at noon (I, 104-109, 116, 117; IV, 4325); but beginning in the 95th
    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 (e.g., H.
    Res. 7, Jan. 4, 1977, p. 70). 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. The House may
    provide for a session of the House on a Sunday, traditionally a ``dies
    non'' under the precedents of the House (e.g., Dec. 17, 1982, p. 31946;
    Dec. 18, 1987, p. 36352; 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 certain days for morning-hour debate and
    then recess to the hour established for convening under a previous order
    (see Sec. 951, infra).

      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 the 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 the 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).

    [[Page 335]]

    leged, nondebatable motion that the Journal be read pending
    the Speaker's announcement of approval and before agreement by the House
    (Apr. 23, 1975, p. 11482).
      Before the 92d Congress, the reading of the Journal was mandatory and
    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 privi

      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; clause 7(a) of 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.

      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).

    [[Page 336]]

    the Sergeant-at-Arms to assist in maintaining
    such decorum (Sept. 17, 1997, pp. 19026, 19027). The Chair announced
    that failure to heed the gavel constitutes an act of stark incivility
    (July 28, 2009, p. _).
      The Speaker may name a Member who is disorderly, but may not, of the
    Speaker's own authority, censure or punish the Member (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). Before the establishment
    of recess authority in clause 12(b), the Speaker, as an exercise of
    authority under this clause, has on 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 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 (see, e.g., Oct. 8, 2002, p.
    19543; Apr. 29, 2010, p. _). After repeated disturbances in the gallery,
    the chair of the Committee of the Whole warned occupants of the gallery
    of possible prosecution (under 40 U.S.C. 5104) (Apr. 15, 2011, p. _).
    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 before the adoption of the rules (Speaker Gingrich, Jan.
    4, 1995, p. 454).

    [[Page 337]]

    tional
    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 the disallowance
    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. 11008). 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 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
    concerning 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 chair of the Committee of
    the Whole reinforced the Chair's authority to control the use of
    exhibits in debate, distinguishing between the constitu

      At the request of the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct (now
    Ethics), 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; Mar. 4, 1998, p. 2523; Mar. 21,
    2010, p. _).

      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 338]]

    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). The Chair announced that time consumed while obtaining
    order would not be charged to the Member under recognition (Mar. 21,
    2010, p. _).

    Control of Capitol facilities
      Recognition is within the discretion of the Chair, and in order to
    uphold order and decorum in the House as required under clause 2 of rule
    I, the Speaker may deny a Member recognition for a ``one-minute speech''
    (Aug. 27, 1980, p. 23456). Furthermore, it is a breach of decorum for a
    Member to continue to speak beyond the time for which recognized (Mar.
    22, 1996, p. 6086; May 22, 2003, p. 12965; Oct. 2, 2003, pp. 23949,
    23950), 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

    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).

    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). The Speaker has announced standards for
    use of the Chamber when the House is not in session (Speaker Pelosi,
    Jan. 6, 2009, p. _; Speaker Boehner, Jan. 5, 2011, _).

    [[Page 339]]

    the House. The Speaker may sign enrolled bills and joint
    resolutions whether or not the House is in session.

    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 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) or a Speaker pro tempore under
    clause 8 of rule I. 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).

    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 under clause 2(m) of rule XI need only be signed
    by the chair of that committee, whereas when the House issues an order
    or warrant, the summons is issued under the hand and seal of the
    Speaker, and it must be attested by the Clerk (III, 1668; see H. Rept.
    96-1078, p. 22).

    [[Page 340]]

    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; July 9, 2009, p. _), 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, pp. 8590, 8591).
    A point of order may be withdrawn as a matter of right before action
    thereon (e.g., June 24, 2008, p. _). Present insistence on a point of
    order takes precedence over reservation (Nov. 19, 2009, p. _). 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). 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 taking time for examination of the
    question (III, 2725; VI, 432; VII, 2106; VIII, 2174, 2396, 3475; Mar.
    24, 2010, p. _).

    [[Page 341]]

    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). If 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) and is solely to edify the
    judgment of the Chair, who may decline to hear more when prepared to
    rule (Mar. 3, 2011, p. _). 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). Members must address the Chair and
    cannot engage in colloquies on the point of order (e.g., Sept. 18, 1986,
    p. 24083; May 19, 2005, p. 10337), nor can they offer pro forma
    amendments to debate the point of order (July 21, 1998, p. 16369; June
    27, 2007, pp. 17715, 17716) or the underlying proposition (Feb. 16,
    2011, p. _). 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; June 12, 2008, p.
    _). However, the Committee of the Whole by unanimous consent has allowed
    a Member to revise and extend his remarks to follow the ruling

      The Chair is constrained to give precedent its proper influence (II,
    1317; VI, 248). Although 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 if 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, pp. 44 0946); (2) the constitutional competency
    of proposed legislation (II, 1255, 1318-1322, VI, 250, 251; VIII, 2225,
    3031, 3427; July 21, 1947, pp. 9522, 9551; May 13, 1948, p. 5817; Oct.
    10, 1998, p. 25424); (3) the constitutional rights of Members (VIII,
    3071).

    [[Page 342]]

    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, the Chair 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 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 if the
    Chair is not aware of the executive-session status of the information
    (Nov. 5, 1997, p. 24648). 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 the duty of the
    Chair 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 if the Chair's response might depend on the disposition of
    a prior amendment on which 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

    [[Page 343]]

      Under long practice, 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). The Chair ruled that the requirement of former clause 9
    of rule XIV (now clause 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 (Speaker Gingrich, Jan.
    20, 1995, p. 1866).

      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, pp. 25031,
    25032). 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, pp.
    25031, 25032), including one required to be printed in the Congressional
    Record where the Record had not yet been printed (Jan. 26, 2011, _). 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).

      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
    takes initiative to raise and submit a question (II, 1277, 1315, 1316;
    VIII, 3405). Even as to questions of privilege the Speaker 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 344]]

    the floor yields for that purpose (Oct. 1, 1986, p. 27465;
    July 13, 1989, p. 14633) and the yielding Member is charged time
    consumed thereby (Nov. 7, 2009, p. _). A Member under recognition for a
    parliamentary inquiry may not yield to another Member (Nov. 22, 2002, p.
    23510).

    Sec. 628a. Practice governing the Speaker in
    entertaining parliamentary inquiries.

      Recognition  for parliamentary inquiry lies
    in the discretion of the Chair (VI, 541; Apr. 7, 1992, p. 8273; Nov. 7,
    2009, p. _). As such, the Chair may recognize for a demand for the yeas
    and nays rather than entertain a parliamentary inquiry (Aug. 4, 2007, p.
    23233). The Speaker may recognize and respond to a parliamentary inquiry
    although the previous question may have been demanded (Mar. 27, 1926, p.
    6469). Although the Chair has discretion to recognize Members for
    parliamentary inquiries when no other Member is occupying the floor for
    debate, a parliamentary inquiry may not be raised unless the Member
    having

      The Speaker may take a parliamentary inquiry under advisement,
    especially if 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, pp. 21557, 21558). The Chair announced parameters for a proper
    parliamentary inquiry (Mar. 21, 2010, p _) and announced his intention
    to refuse further recognition on a particular line of improper inquiry
    (Mar. 21, 2010, p. _).

      The Speaker may entertain a parliamentary inquiry during a record vote
    if it relates to the vote (Oct. 9, 1997, p. 22017; Oct. 6, 1999, p.
    24199; Sept. 9, 2003, pp. 21557, 21558; Mar. 30, 2004, pp. 5577, 5578).
    However, the Speaker will not (1) respond to a request to place the
    length of a record vote in historical context (Sept. 9, 2003, p. 21558),
    (2) explain the exercise of discretion to hold a vote open beyond the
    minimum time prescribed under clause 2 of rule XX (Mar. 30, 2004, pp.
    5577, 5578; Mar. 21, 2010, p. _), or (3) state the vote tally as it
    stood upon expiration of the minimum time (May 8, 2008, p. _).

    [[Page 345]]

    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. 541)); (13)
    judge the appropriateness of Senate action (Apr. 10, 2003, p. 9279);
    (14) characterize proceedings of a committee (June 15, 2006, p. 11409)
    or speculate as to the operation of committee rules (July 27, 2007, p.
    21124; Oct. 10, 2007, p. 26993), although the Chair has confirmed that
    the adoption of a motion to recommit with instructions to report
    ``promptly'' does not necessarily suspend the operation of any rule of
    the House (Feb. 27, 2008, p. _) or of a committee (Nov. 15, 2007, p. _);
    (15) speculate whether Members-elect are entitled to compensation prior
    to taking the oath of office (Jan. 7, 2011, p. _).
      A proper parliamentary inquiry relates to an interpretation of a House
    rule, not of a statute or of the Constitution (Oct. 10, 1998, p. 25424;
    July 18, 2006, p. 14784). 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; July 16, 2009, p. _; Feb. 11, 2011, p. _); (2) judge the
    propriety of words uttered earlier in debate (June 15, 2000, p. 11106;
    July 18, 2007, p. 19560); (3) judge the veracity of remarks in debate
    (June 5, 1996, p. 13195; June 17, 2004, p. 12886); (4) decide whether
    certain remarks in debate were confined to the question under
    consideration (as required by clause 1 of rule XVII) (May 27, 2010, p.
    _); (5) reexamine and explain the validity of a prior ruling (Oct. 26,
    1995, p. 29477; June 8, 2005, pp. 11945, 11946; May 15, 2008, p. _); (6)
    anticipate the precedential effect of a ruling (Oct. 10, 1998, p.
    25424); (7) judge the accuracy of the content of an exhibit (Nov. 10,
    1995, p. 32142); (8) 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); (9) respond to political
    commentary (June 25, 1998, p. 13978; Apr. 4, 2001, p. 5417; Oct. 8,
    2004, p. 22634); (10) 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); (11) anticipate whether bill language would trigger certain
    executive actions; (12) interpret a pending proposition (Sept. 20, 1989,
    p. 20969; May 13, 1998, p. 9129; July 9, 2009, p. _; Mar. 20, 2010, p.
    _) (although the

      The Chair may clarify a prior response to a parliamentary inquiry
    (July 31, 1996, p. 20700; Mar. 21, 2010, p. _).

    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). Although a decision of
    the Chair on a point of order is subject to appeal on demand of any
    Member, a Member cannot secure a recorded vote on a point of order
    absent an appeal and the Chair's putting the question thereon (June 20,
    1996, p. 14847).

    [[Page 346]]

    timeliness of a Member's demand that words be
    taken down is subject to appeal (Jan. 22, 2007, p. 1899).
      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. 12299; July 9, 2009, p. _); (3) decision on dilatoriness of motions
    (V, 5731); (4) question on which an appeal has just been decided (IV,
    3036; V, 6877); (5) 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) count of a quorum (July 24, 1974, p.
    25012); (7) call of a voice vote (Aug. 10, 1994, p. 20766); (8) refusal
    to recapitulate a vote (VIII, 3128); (9) 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) 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) 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, pp. 6393, 6394). 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. 12299), the
    Chair's ruling on

      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); (4) when
    dilatory (V, 5715-5722; VIII, 2822).

      An appeal may be debated (VII, 1608; VIII, 2347, 2375, 3453-3455; June
    24, 2003, pp. 15854-56); unless laid 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. 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, pp. 15854-56), and may be closed by motion to close
    debate or to rise and report (V, 6947, 6950; VIII, 3453). An appeal of a
    ruling of the Chair may be withdrawn in the Committee of the Whole as a
    matter of right (June 8, 2000, p. 9954). An appeal may be withdrawn at
    any time before action by the House thereon (as where the Chair has not
    even stated the question on appeal) (May 6, 2004, pp. 8590, 8591).

    Form of a question
      The House has postponed, along with the underlying matter, an appeal
    from a decision of the Chair thereon (VIII, 2613). The Speaker may vote
    to sustain the Speaker's 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).

    [[Page 347]]

    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).

    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

    631. The Speaker's vote. Tie vote.

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

      This clause was adopted in 1789, and amended in 1850 (V, 5964) and
    1911. A gender-based reference was eliminated in the 111th Congress
    (sec. 2(l), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, p. _). 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), it has historically rarely been
    exercised (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 the
    Speaker's 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 the Speaker's vote 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,
    or 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, the Speaker 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 the Speaker's vote
    would be decisive (V, 5969, 6061-6063; VIII, 3075). In one instance the
    Speaker asserted a right to withdraw a 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 chair 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).

    [[Page 348]]

    such an appointment may not extend beyond three
    legislative days.

    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),

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

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

      (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 the election of the Speaker and
    whenever 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).

    [[Page 349]]

      (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.

      Paragraph (a) was adopted in 1811 and limited to three
    legislative days in 1920 (VI, 263). Paragraph (b)(1) was adopted in 1876
    (II, 1377). Paragraph (b)(2) was adopted in the 99th Congress (H. Res.
    7, Jan. 3, 1985, p. 393). Paragraph (b)(3) was adopted in the 108th
    Congress (sec. 2(a), H. Res. 5, Jan. 7, 2003, p. 7). Gender-based
    references were eliminated in the 111th Congress (sec. 2(l), H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 6, 2009, p. _). 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). The Speaker delivers to the
    Clerk the list required under paragraph (b)(3)(B) and announces such
    delivery to the House (e.g., Mar. 13, 2003, p. 6118; Jan. 20, 2005, p.
    266).

    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 such election (II, 1386-1389, 1405-1412; VI, 275). On August 31, 1961
    (p. 17765), the House adopted House Resolution 445, electing Hon. John
    W. McCormack as Speaker pro tempore in the absence and terminal illness
    of Speaker Rayburn. The resolution provided that the Clerk notify the
    President and the Senate. The chair 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
    may agree by unanimous consent to the Speaker's appointment under this
    clause of Members in the alternative to act as Speakers pro tempore to
    sign enrollments through a date certain (e.g., Aug. 6, 1998, p. 19128)
    or for an entire Congress (e.g., Jan. 6, 2009, p. _).

    [[Page 350]]

    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), but rarely otherwise (II, 1382,
    1390; III, 2596; VI, 264).

    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 debate, the Speaker designates a Speaker pro tempore in
    writing (II, 1378, 1401); but does not usually announce the Members
    called to the chair temporarily during the day's sitting (II, 1379,
    1400). The presence of the Speaker either at the opening of morning-hour
    debate 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;

    635. Drug testing in the House.

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

      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).

    [[Page 351]]

    penses for such travel may be paid from applicable
    accounts of the House described in clause 1(k)(1) of rule X on vouchers
    approved and signed solely by the Speaker.

    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. Ex

    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, 109th, and 112th 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.
    42; sec. 2(e)(8), H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 2011, 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 chair of the committee
    for members and employees thereof.

    [[Page 352]]

    of the bill or resolution passed or adopted by the
    House.

    637. Select and conference committees.

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

      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
    the initial appointment was added in the 103d Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan.
    5, 1993, p. 49). The provision requiring the Speaker to appoint a
    majority of Members who generally supported the House position became
    effective on January 3, 1975 (H. Res. 988, 93d Cong., Oct. 8, 1974, p.
    34470). The provision requiring the Speaker to appoint Members primarily
    responsible for the legislation was added in the 95th Congress (H. Res.
    5, Jan. 4, 1977, pp. 53-70). Before the House recodified its rules in
    the 106th Congress, this provision was found in former clause 6(f) of
    rule X (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

      Before 1880 the House could 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 chair (II, 1275; III, 2342;
    IV, 4514-4516). However, in modern practice, except for matters of
    ceremony, the inconvenience and even impropriety of the usage has caused
    it often to be disregarded (IV, 4517-4523, 4671). The Speaker has
    removed Members from a select committee (e.g., Sept. 8, 2004, pp. 17754,
    17755).

      It is within the discretion of the Chair whom to appoint as conferees
    (June 24, 1932, p. 13876; July 8, 1947, p. 8469), and such 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 353]]

    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 the 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. 25816), or substitution of one conferee for another (Dec. 16,
    2005, p. 29212; Oct. 6, 2009, p. _), or by expansion of the
    specification of provisions for which a conferee is appointed (Oct. 3,
    2002, p. 19011; Nov. 14, 2005, p. 25816). In the 102d Congress the
    Speaker reiterated the announced policy of simplifying conference
    appointments by noting on the occasion of a relatively complex
    appointment that, inasmuch as conference committees are select
    committees that dissolve when their report is acted upon, conference
    appointments should not be construed as jurisdictional precedent
    (Speaker Foley, June 3, 1992, p. 13288). The Speaker may fill a vacancy
    on a conference committee by appointment but may not accept a
    resignation from a conference committee (as contrasted with the
    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);
    (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.

    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.

    [[Page 354]]

    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. 16241; July 13, 2009, p. _).

      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 (Apr. 30, 1998, p. 7381) or
    having withdrawn recognition for a special-order speech (Nov. 4, 2009,
    p. _), the Speaker may declare a recess for a short time under this
    paragraph (there being no question then pending before the House). A
    Member's mere revelation that the Member seeks to offer a motion to
    adjourn does not suffice

    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 Chair of the Committee of the Whole may declare an emergency recess
    subject to the call of the Chair.

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

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

          (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.

    [[Page 355]]

      (d) The Speaker may convene the House in a place at the seat of
    government other than the Hall of the House whenever, in the opinion of
    the Speaker, 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. 19 (adopted Jan. 5, 2007)). Gender-
    based references were eliminated in the 111th Congress (sec. 2(l), H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, p. _). For similar authority in the Senate, see
    Senate Resolution 296 (108th Cong., Feb. 3, 2004, p. 731). An emergency
    recess under paragraph (b) was declared by the Speaker pro tempore on
    May 11, 2005 (p. 9163) and by the chair of the Committee of the Whole on
    June 29, 2005 (p. 14835). 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. The Speaker has changed the convening time
    under paragraph (c) upon notification by the Sergeant-at-Arms of an
    imminent impairment to reconvening (Dec. 19, 2009, p. _).

                                     Rule II

    Elections
                          other officers and officials

    640. Election, oath, and removal of officers.

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

    [[Page 356]]

    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, 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). Gender-based references were
    eliminated in the 111th Congress (sec. 2(l), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, p.
    _). For a discussion of the former Office of the Doorkeeper, see
    Sec. 663a, infra; and for a discussion of the evolution of the Chief
    Administrative Officer (an elected officer) from the former Director of
    Non-legislative and Financial Services (an officer appointed jointly by
    the Speaker and the Majority and Minority Leaders under clause 1 of rule
    VI of the 103d Congress), see Sec. 664, infra.
      When the House recodified its rules, it consolidated former rules II
    through VII, former clauses 10 and 11 of rule I, former clause 6 of rule
    XIII, and former clause 5 of rule XVI under rule II (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6,

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

    [[Page 357]]

    has exercised the 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. 27489), 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; July 15, 2010, p. _). A resolution
    electing a House officer is presented as a question of privilege (July
    31, 1997, p. 17021; Speaker Hastert, Dec. 6, 2005, p. 27569) even when
    prospective (Feb. 6, 2007, p. 3156). 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. 3156) and may be prospective (July 15,
    2010, p. _).

    Clerk
      The House has declined to interfere with the Clerk's power of removing
    subordinates (I, 249). Employees under the Clerk and other officers are
    to be assigned only 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

    641. Clerk; commencement of first session.

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

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

    [[Page 358]]

    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. 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 requires the furnishing of 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

    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. 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).

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

    Sec. 644. The roll of Memberselect.

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

    Sec. 645. Clerk as presiding officer at
    organizations.

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

    [[Page 359]]

      Before clause 8(b)(3) of rule I, this clause operated also in the case
    of a vacancy in the Office of the Speaker arising during a Congress. For
    example, upon the death of the Speaker during an adjournment sine die 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, clause 8(b)(3) of rule I now 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 required to be made by such officer.

      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). A gender-based reference was eliminated in the 111th Congress
    (sec. 2(l), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, p. _).

      (c) The Clerk shall--

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

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

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

    [[Page 360]]

          (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.

      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 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 that
    resolution (see Sec. 664, infra). Clerical corrections were effected at
    the beginning of the 104th Congress (sec. 223(f), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4,
    1995, p. 469) and the 106th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).
    During the 104th Congress the requirement to send a printed copy of the
    Journal to each branch of every State legislature was changed to an
    authorization to send such copies on request (H. Res. 254, Nov. 30,
    1995, p. 35077). Subparagraphs (3) and (4) were amended in the 107th
    Congress to permit the Clerk to publish the Journal in a form other than
    printed (sec. 2(a), H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 2001, p. 25).

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

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

    [[Page 361]]

    Senate, and report to the House the fact and date
    of their presentment.

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

      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 the Speaker's 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 chair of the committee is sufficient (III, 1668).

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

      A special order of business reported by the Committee on Rules
    directing the Clerk to refrain from certifying an enrollment pending the
    resolution of a given contingency does not violate subparagraph (2)
    (Apr. 13, 2011, p. _).

    Sec. 649. Calendars distributed.

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

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

      (f) The Clerk shall--

    [[Page 362]]

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

    Sec. 650. Documents.

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

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

      Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress,
    paragraphs (c) and (f) were found in former clause 3 of rule III (H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). They were amended in the 92d Congress to
    include Delegates and the Resident Commissioner among those entitled to
    the listed services (H. Res. 5, Jan. 22, 1971, pp. 140-44; H. Res. 1153,
    Oct. 13, 1972, pp. 36013-15). Paragraph (f) 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 the temporary absence or disability of the Clerk
    by designating an official in the Office of the Clerk to sign all papers
    that may require the official signature of the Clerk and to perform all
    other official acts that the Clerk may be required to perform under the
    rules and practices of the House, except such official acts as are
    provided for by statute. Official acts performed by the designated
    official shall be under the name of the Clerk. The designation shall be
    in writing and shall be laid before the House and entered on the
    Journal.

    [[Page 363]]

    ed January 3, 1953 (p. 16). Form of designation of a Clerk
    pro tempore (VI, 26). Technical corrections were effected in the 108th
    Congress (sec. 2(u), H. Res. 5, Jan. 7, 2003, p. 7). A gender-based
    reference was eliminated in the 111th Congress (sec. 2(l), H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 6, 2009, p. _).

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

    Sec. 652. Authority to receive messages.

      (h)  The Clerk may
    receive messages from the President and from the Senate at any time when
    the House is in recess or adjournment.

      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 in the 97th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 5,
    1981, pp. 98-113) and amended in the 111th Congress to apply to recesses
    as well as adjournments (sec. 2(m), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, p. _) to
    reflect current practice (see Dec. 22, 1987, p. 37966). 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.

    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. When acting as a supervisory
    authority over such staff, the Clerk shall have authority to terminate
    employees and, with the approval of the Committee on House
    Administration, may appoint such staff as is required to operate the
    office until a successor is elected.

    [[Page 364]]

    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).

      (2) For 60 days following the death of a former Speaker, the Clerk
    shall maintain on the House

    -  (j) In <> addition to any other
    reports required by the Speaker or the Committee on House
    Administration, the Clerk shall report to the Committee on House
    Administration not later than 45 days following the close of each
    semiannual period ending on June 30 or on December 31 on the financial
    and operational status of each function under the jurisdiction of the
    Clerk. Each report shall include financial statements and a description
    or explanation of current operations, the implementation of new policies
    and procedures, and future plans for each function.
      Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this
    paragraph was found in former clause 6 of rule III (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6,
    1999, p. 47). It was adopted initially in the 98th Congress (H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 3, 1983, p. 34). It was amended in the 104th and 106th Congresses
    to reflect changes in the name of the Committee on House Administration
    (sec. 202(b), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 464; H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999,
    p. 47). A gender-based reference was eliminated in the 111th Congress
    (sec. 2(l), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, p. _).

    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.

    [[Page 365]]

    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).
      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

    Sergeant-at-Arms--
      The Clerk is also required to make certain reports on receipts and
    expenditures under law (2 U.S.C. 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 the Sergeant-
    at-Arms by the Speaker.

    [[Page 366]]

    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. A
    gender-based reference was eliminated in the 111th Congress (sec. 2(l),
    H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, p. _). Amendments adopted in the 92d Congress
    to clarify 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) were stricken by 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
    transferred to the Director of Non-legislative and Financial Services
    pursuant to that resolution (see Sec. 664, supra). 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). 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

      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(k)(1) of rule X''), under rules
    prescribed by the Committee on House Administration, to defray the
    expenses of the funeral of a deceased Member of the House and the
    expenses of any delegation of Members of Congress duly appointed to
    attend (76 Stat. 686; 2 U.S.C. 124).

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

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

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

      Duties imposed on the Sergeant-at-Arms by law (I, 258) include control
    of the Capitol Police; and the making up of the roll of Members-elect
    and presiding over the organization of a new Congress in case of vacancy
    in the Office of the Clerk, or the absence or disability of that officer
    (2 U.S.C. 26). The death of the Sergeant-at-Arms being announced, the
    House passed appropriate resolutions and adjourned as a mark of respect
    (VI, 32; July 8, 1953, p. 8263). The Clerk having died, and in the
    absence of the Sergeant-at-Arms, the Doorkeeper of the 79th Congress
    presided at the organization of the 80th Congress (Jan. 3, 1947, p. 33).
    In the 83d Congress the Sergeant-at-Arms having died, the Clerk was
    elected to serve temporarily both as Clerk and Sergeant-at-Arms (July 8,
    1953, p. 8242), and upon resignation by the Clerk from the 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).

    [[Page 367]]

    was rewritten entirely in the 104th Congress, the paragraph
    was restated without change (sec. 201(c), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p.
    463). A gender-based reference was eliminated in the 111th Congress
    (sec. 2(l), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, p. _). Extreme disorder arising on
    the floor, the Speaker directed the Sergeant-at-Arms to enforce order
    with the mace (VI, 258; VIII, 2530), but an attempt to enforce order
    without the mace has been questioned as illegitimate (II, 1347).

      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

    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
    employees of the Office of the Sergeant-at-Arms.

      (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, 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

    [[Page 368]]

    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).
    Gender-based references were eliminated in the 111th Congress (sec.
    2(l), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, p. _). For the history of the Office of
    the Doorkeeper, see Sec. 663a, infra.

    Sec. 660. Cooperation with others.

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

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

    661. Duties.

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

    [[Page 369]]

    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.

    Sec. 663a. Former Office of Doorkeeper.

      Before  the 104th
    Congress (sec. 201(c), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 463), rule V
    enumerated the duties of the Doorkeeper, who enforced the rules relating
    to the privileges of the Hall of the House. The earlier form of the rule
    was adopted in 1838 and amended in 1869, 1880 (I, 260), and 1890 (V,
    7295). By law the Doorkeeper was assigned certain administrative duties
    (I, 262), including certain housekeeping functions. Through 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, 422).-

    [[Page 370]]

    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. 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
    on October 23, 1992 (Oct. 29, 1992, p. 34802).

    Chaplain

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

      The Chief  Administrative Officer supplanted the Director of
    Non-legislative and Financial Services formerly provided for under
    clause 1 of rule VI in the 103d Congress, which corresponded to an
    erstwhile rule LII of the 102d Congress. Certain functions and entities
    formerly within the purview of elected officers were transferred to the
    Director of Non-legislative and Financial Services pursuant to the House
    Administrative Reform Resolution of 1992 (H. Res. 423, Apr. 9, 1992, p.
    9040), which also vested the Committee on House Administration with
    authority to prescribe regulations providing for the orderly transfer of
    such functions and entities

    665. Duties of the Chaplain.

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

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

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

    [[Page 371]]

    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) provide audit, investigative, and advisory services to the
    House and joint entities in a manner consistent with government-wide
    standards;

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

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

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

    [[Page 372]]

    ral to the
    appropriate Federal or State authorities under clause 3(a)(3) of rule
    XI.

          (5) report to the Committee on Ethics 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 refer

      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). Paragraph (c)(1) was amended, and gender-
    based references were eliminated, in the 111th Congress (secs. 2(a),
    2(l), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, p. _). Paragraph (c)(5) was amended in
    the 112th Congress to reflect a change in committee name (sec. 2(e)(8),
    H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 2011, p. _).

      In the form of the rule adopted in the 103d Congress, paragraph (a)
    (formerly clause 1) corresponded to an erstwhile rule LII of the 102d
    Congress (relating to the Director of Non-legislative and Financial
    Services, who in the 104th Congress was supplanted by the Chief
    Administrative Officer; see clause 4 of rule II, Sec. Sec. 661-663,
    supra), and paragraph (b) (formerly clause 2) corresponded to an
    erstwhile rule LIII of the 102d Congress (relating to the Inspector
    General). The 104th Congress rewrote clause 2 of rule VI (as it was
    composed in the 103d Congress) to occupy all of rule VI and to: broaden
    the auditing responsibilities beyond the offices of the elected officers
    (paragraph (c)(1), formerly clause 2(c)(1)); add requirements for
    simultaneous reporting (paragraphs (c)(3) and (4), formerly clauses
    2(c)(3) and (4)); delete a provision relating to classification of
    employees (formerly clause 2(d)); and add the responsibility to report
    certain information to the Committee on Ethics (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).

    [[Page 373]]

    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, which
    supervised 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 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.

    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 200th 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).

    [[Page 374]]

    pay for employees of the Office of
    General Counsel.

    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

      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 initially in the 103d Congress (H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 5, 1993, p. 49). The previous year, in 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.

      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)). The House
    may authorize the General Counsel to represent a committee or take other
    action in a judicial proceeding (Feb. 14, 2008, p. _; sec. 4(f), H. Res.
    5, Jan. 6, 2009, p. _).

                                    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
    having a direct personal or pecuniary interest in the event of such
    question.

    [[Page 375]]

      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). A gender-based reference was eliminated in
    the 111th Congress (sec. 2(l), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, p. _). 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
    although 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).

    Sec. 672. Control of a Member's 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 and not the Chair should determine this question (V, 5950, 5951;
    VIII, 3071; Speaker Albert, Dec. 2, 1975, p. 38135; Speaker O'Neill,
    Mar. 1, 1979, p. 3748; July 30, 1996, p. 19952; July 16, 2009, p. _),
    and the Speaker has denied the Speaker's 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).

      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).

    [[Page 376]]

    Sec. 673. Nature of disqualifying personal interest.

      It  is a
    principle of ``immemorial observance'' that a Member should withdraw
    when a question concerning that Member 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 in which 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). A Member should not vote on direct questions affecting
    that Member, but has sometimes voted on incidental questions (V, 5960,
    5961).

    Sec. 674. Voting.

      2.  (a) A Member may not authorize any
    other person to cast the vote of such Member or record the presence of
    such Member 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.

    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). Gender-based references were eliminated in the 111th
    Congress (sec. 2(l), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, p. _). The Committee on
    Standards of Official Conduct (now Ethics) 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) Each Delegate and the
    Resident Commissioner shall be elected to serve on standing committees
    in the same manner as Members and shall possess in such committees the
    same powers and privileges as the other members of the committee.

    [[Page 377]]

    ed 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 (later changed to 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. 985, infra). The
    changes effected in the 103d Congress were revoked in the 104th Congress
    (sec. 212, H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 462), reinstated in the 110th
    Congress (H. Res. 78, Jan. 24, 2007, p. 2140), and revoked in the 112th
    Congress (sec. 2(e)(4), H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 2011, p. _).
      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), January 3, 1991 (H. Res. 5, 102d
    Cong., p. 39), and January 5, 2011 (H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 2011, p. _)
    (technical correction). 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 elect

      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 (later changed to 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 Delegate from the Commonwealth of the Northern
    Mariana Islands was established by Public Law 110-229 (122 Stat. 868).
    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.

    [[Page 378]]

    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). A Delegate may be appointed a teller (II,
    1302); but the law forbids a Delegate to vote (II, 1290). A Delegate 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.
    23853) 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 Delegates in
    parliamentary matters are not limited to legislation affecting their 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. 3550).
      The law provides that on the floor of the House a Delegate may debate
    (II, 1290), and may in debate call a Member to order (II, 1295), may
    make any motion that a Member may make except the motion to reconsider
    (II, 1291, 1292), and may make a point of order (VI, 240). A Delegate
    has even moved an impeachment (II, 1303). However, a resolution offered

      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). A Delegate may be arrested and censured for disorderly conduct
    (II, 1305), but there has been disagreement as to whether expulsion is
    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).

    [[Page 379]]

    be appointed to a select committee only with the permission
    of the House (Sept. 21, 1976, p. 31673).

     end segment .005 segment .006 -- rule IV through rule IX

      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

                                     Rule IV

    Use and admittance
                            the hall of the house

    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.

      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). A technical amendment to this clause, in
    conjunction with one to clause 2(b), was effected in the 112th Congress
    (sec. 2(f), H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 2011, p. _). The Speaker has announced
    standards for use of the Chamber when the House is not in session
    (Speaker Pelosi, Jan. 6, 2009, p. _).

    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.

    [[Page 380]]

          (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).

          (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 Ethics when a recommendation of that committee is under
    consideration in the House.

    [[Page 381]]

          (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 or clauses 1, 3, 4, or 5.

      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,
    7283; 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 Congress was
    revised to grant all Delegates 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. 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. In the 112th Congress,
    paragraph (a)(16) was amended to reflect a change in committee name and
    paragraph (b) was amended to clarify the breadth of the restriction on
    suspending various prohibitions of rule IV, which had been
    unintentionally narrowed by recodification in the 106th Congress (secs.
    2(e)(8), 2(f)(2), H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 2011, p. _).

      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.

    [[Page 382]]

    ernors of States'' does not include
    governors of territories (V, 7283; VIII, 3634).
      The portion of the clause forbidding the Speaker to entertain requests
    for suspension of certain clauses applies also to the chair of the
    Committee of the Whole (V, 7285) but the House may grant specific access
    by resolution (e.g., July 26, 2010, p. _). ``Heads of departments''
    means members of the President's Cabinet, and not subordinate executive
    officers, and ``foreign ministers'' means ministers from foreign
    governments only. ``Gov

      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 in which 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 an
    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. 12847), 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.

    [[Page 383]]

      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 such individual--

          (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

          (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 to carry out this rule
    including regulations that exempt ceremonial or educational functions
    from the restrictions of this clause.

    [[Page 384]]

      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. 540).
    The 111th Congress clarified the authority of the Speaker over the
    entire rule and not merely the exemptions specified in paragraph (b),
    and eliminated a gender-based reference (secs. 2(l), 2 (m), H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 6, 2009, 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. 644;
    Speaker Pelosi, Jan. 5, 2007, p. 273).

      A former Member has not been entitled to the privileges of the floor
    under this clause if (1) having a direct personal or pecuniary interest
    in legislation under consideration in the House or reported by any
    committee, or (2) representing 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 if 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. 541).

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

    [[Page 385]]

    forts 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.

    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 ef

    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 having 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 distribute 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).

    [[Page 386]]

    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
    the family of such individual, 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). A gender-based reference was eliminated in the 111th
    Congress (sec. 2(l), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, p. _).

    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.

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

    [[Page 387]]

      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, direct, and control a system 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 the Speaker
    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, direct, and control a system 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.

      (b) All television and radio broadcasting stations, networks,
    services, and systems (including cable systems) that are accredited to
    the House 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.

    [[Page 388]]

      (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 the responsibilities under this
    rule to such legislative entity as the Speaker 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). Gender-based references were eliminated in the
    111th Congress (sec. 2(l), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, p. _). The
    requirement that televised broadcasts of 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 389]]

    (Legislative Branch Appropriations Act, 1979) contained the
    following proviso: ``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 the
    Speaker's 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 broadcasting 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

      Pursuant to 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 debate
    (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 recognition
    for debate (Mar. 16, 1988, p. 4081).

                                    Rule VI

    Official reporters
                official reporters and news media galleries

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

    [[Page 390]]

      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).

      4. Return of manuscript.--When manuscript is submitted to Members for
    revision it should be returned to the Government Printing Office not
    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.

    [[Page 391]]

    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.
      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

      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.

      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) provides that conference reports be printed in the
    daily edition of the Congressional Record, they shall not be printed
    therein a second time.

      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.

    [[Page 392]]

    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.
      The official reporters of each House shall designate and distinctly
    mark the lead item among their extensions. When both Houses are in
    session

      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

      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 Congress 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.

      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.

    [[Page 393]]

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

      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.

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

    [[Page 394]]

    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).

    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

      Words spoken by a Member not under recognition are not included in the
    Congressional Record (V, 6975-6978; VIII, 3466, 3471) and a Member
    should not expect the official reporters to transcribe such remarks
    (Jan. 24, 2011, p. _). 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. 12965; Oct. 2, 2003, p. 23950); (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, pp. 7588, 7600). 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).

      Under long practice and applicable precedents and guidelines, the
    Chair has refined rulings on points of order in the Record in order to
    clarify them without changing their substance, including those 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 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). In the 104th Congress the
    Speaker ruled that the requirement of clause 8 of rule XVII (formerly
    clause 9 of rule XIV) that the Record be a substantially verbatim
    account of remarks made during House proceedings extended to statements
    and rulings of the Chair (Jan. 20, 1995, p. 1866).

    [[Page 395]]

    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 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-

      The traditional practice to allow Members, with the approval of the
    House and under conditions set forth by the Joint Committee on Printing,
    to revise 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 the Member's own speech in such a way as to affect the
    remarks of another without bringing the correction to the attention of
    that Member (V, 6972; VIII, 3461) because such alterations 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 that Member, delivered by another Member and withheld for revision
    (V, 6964).

    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 a call to order (V, 6987). In a case wherein a
    letter read in Committee involved a breach of privilege, the Committee
    reported the matter to the House for action, and the House struck the
    letter from the Record (V, 6986). The chair 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).
    The Committee of the Whole may neither 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 permit the inclusion of extraneous material (Jan. 23, 1936, p. 950;
    Feb. 1, 1937, p. 656; Sept. 19, 1967, p. 26032).

    [[Page 396]]

    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), because 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).

    Sec. 689. Correction of the Congressional
    Record.

      Although 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, because this would be
    determining what a Member should utter on the floor (V, 6974; VI, 583;
    VIII, 3469, 3498). Neither should one House strike 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 was 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
    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

      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 votes (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).

      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 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). A resolution directing the placement
    of an asterisk in the Record to note alleged inaccuracies in a 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, pp. 25255, 25256). Propositions to make corrections are sometimes
    considered by the Committee on House Administration.

    [[Page 397]]

    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 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).

    Sec. 690. Unparliamentary remarks and the Congressional
    Record.

      Where  a Member had uttered disorderly words on the floor without
    challenge, the House decided that it was not precluded from action when
    the words, after being withheld for revision, appeared in the Record,
    and struck them (V, 6979, 6981; VI, 582; VIII, 2538, 3463, 3472). The
    House also has ordered stricken 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

    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 fully debate public questions on the floor (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 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 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. 2791) given the form of clause 1 of rule XVII as adopted in
    the 109th Congress.

    [[Page 398]]

    Member, by unanimous consent, may be given leave to extend
    remarks (V, 7009, 7010; VIII, 3488-3490), though such leave should be
    granted only 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).
      The House, and not the Speaker, determines what liberty shall be
    allowed to a Member who has leave to extend 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

      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 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 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).

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

    [[Page 399]]

    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; Sec. 686, supra).
      The Joint Committee on Printing amended the rules for publication of
    the Record, effective March 1, 1978, to require the identification 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

    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 (e.g., Jan. 6,
    1999, p. 247) or a Congress (e.g., Jan. 4, 2007, p. 42).

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

      2.  A portion of the gallery over the Speaker's chair, as may be
    necessary to accommodate representatives of the press wishing to report
    debates and proceedings, shall be set aside for their use. Reputable
    reporters and correspondents shall be admitted thereto under such
    regulations as the Speaker may prescribe from time to time. The Standing
    Committee of Correspondents for the Press Gallery, and the Executive
    Committee of Correspondents for the Periodical Press Gallery, shall
    supervise such galleries, including the designation of its employees,
    subject to the direction and control of the Speaker. The Speaker may
    admit to the floor, under such regulations as the Speaker may prescribe,
    not more than one representative of each press association.

    [[Page 400]]

    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; Jan. 5, 2011, p. _). A
    gender-based reference was eliminated in the 111th Congress (sec. 2(l),
    H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, p. _). See also Consumers Union v. Periodical
    Correspondents' Association, 515 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).

      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,

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

      3.  A portion of the gallery as may be necessary to accommodate
    reporters of news to be disseminated by radio, television, and similar
    means of transmission, wishing to report debates and proceedings, shall
    be set aside for their use. Reputable reporters and correspondents shall
    be admitted thereto under such regulations as the Speaker may prescribe.
    The Executive Committee of the Radio and Television Correspondents'
    Galleries shall supervise such gallery, including the designation of its
    employees, subject to the direction and control of the Speaker. The
    Speaker may admit to the floor, under such regulations as the Speaker
    may prescribe, not more than one representative of each media outlet.

    [[Page 401]]

      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). This provision was first adopted on April 20, 1939 (p.
    4561) and has been amended from time to time (May 30, 1940, p. 7208;
    Jan. 22, 1971, p. 144; Jan. 5, 2011, p. _). A gender-based reference was
    eliminated in the 111th Congress (sec. 2(l), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, p.
    _).

                                    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 chair 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

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

      (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.

    [[Page 402]]

    (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.
      (2) An investigative record that contains personal data relating to a
    specific living person

      (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.

      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 Clerk shall notify in writing the chair and ranking
    minority member of the Committee on House Administration of any such
    determination.

    [[Page 403]]

      (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--

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

          (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.

    [[Page 404]]

    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). Gender-based references were eliminated in the
    111th Congress (sec. 2(l), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, p. _).
      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

    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).

    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 the Office of the
    Clerk relating to such claim. The Clerk may lend temporarily to an
    officer or bureau of the executive departments any papers on file in the
    Office of the Clerk relating to any matter pending before such officer
    or bureau, taking proper receipt therefor.

    [[Page 405]]

    bered January 3, 1953 (p. 24). Gender-based references
    were eliminated in the 111th Congress (sec. 2(l), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6,
    2009, p. _).
      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 renum

      The House usually allows the withdrawal of papers only in cases in
    which 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 for procedure for response to subpoenas for papers of
    the House.

                                    Rule VIII

                              response to subpoenas

    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.

    [[Page 406]]

    er. 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.
      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 Speak

      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.

      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.

    [[Page 407]]

    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.
      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

      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.

      (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
    the Speaker considers appropriate under the circumstances. Upon the
    reconvening of the House, all matters that transpired under this clause
    shall promptly be laid before the House by the Speaker.

    [[Page 408]]

    egate, Resident
    Commissioner, officer, or employee of the House.
      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, Del

      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. In the 95th and 96th Congresses general authority was
    granted to respond to subpoenas without the necessity of a House vote
    (H. Res. 10, Jan. 4, 1977, p. 73; H. Res. 10, Jan. 15, 1979, p. 19).
    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). A gender-based reference was eliminated in the
    111th Congress (sec. 2(l), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, p. _).

      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 Congress, 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).

    [[Page 409]]

      Under clause 2, the Speaker promptly lays before the House a
    communication notifying the Speaker 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 410]]

    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 which the proponent announces to the
    House an 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.

      (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) to codify long-established
    practice that 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 after that Member
    has announced to the House an intention to do so and the content of the
    resolution, and to divide the time for debate on the resolution (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). A gender-based reference was eliminated in
    the 111th Congress (sec. 2(l), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, p. _).

    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 this rule. 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).

    [[Page 411]]

    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); (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).

    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 a
    committee for investigation (H. Res. 1, Jan. 3, 1985, p. 381; H. Res.
    52, Feb. 7, 1985,

      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 412]]

    ing 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 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); (4) questions relating to legal challenges involving the
    prerogatives of the House (Jan. 29, 1981, p. 1304; Mar. 30, 1982, p.
    5890), includ

      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 413]]

      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)); (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 committee chairs to conduct
    oversight of that matter, but refraining from alleging any impropriety
    (Nov. 3, 2005, pp. 24757 0959 (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).

    [[Page 414]]

    (Mar. 30, 2006, p. 4445; Apr. 5, 2006, pp. 4993, 4994);
    (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. 21334);
    (17) alleging a violation of the Code of Official Conduct and issuing a
    reprimand (May 22, 2007, p. 13525); (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. 14600); (19)
    directing the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct to review
    irregularities in the conduct of a vote in the House (Aug. 3, 2007, p.
    22746); (20) directing the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct
    and a previously-established select committee to investigate whether a
    vote was held open beyond a reasonable period of time for the purpose of
    circumventing the will of the House, and vacating such vote (Mar. 12,
    2008, p. _); (21) directing the Committee on Standards of Official
    Conduct to investigate violations of the Code of Official Conduct (Mar.
    12, 2008, p. _); (22) alleging receipt of illegal campaign contributions
    and gifts and censuring a Member therefor (July 31, 2008, p. _); (23)
    alleging receipt of illegal campaign contributions and gifts and
    violations of federal tax law, directing the Committee on Standards of
    Official Conduct to investigate, and removing a Member as chair of a
    standing committee pending such investigation (Sept. 18, 2008, p. _);
    (24) alleging failure to properly report the receipt of gifts in
    accordance with financial disclosure and tax laws, and removing the
    Member as chair pending an on-going investigation by the Committee on
    Standards of Official Conduct (Feb. 10, 2009, p. _; Oct. 7, 2009, p. _);
    (25) alleging a quid pro quo between legislative activity and campaign
    contributions to Members, and directing the Committee on Standards of
    Official Conduct to investigate that relationship (Feb. 25, 2009, p. _;
    Mar. 5, 2009, p. _; Mar. 10, 2009, p. _; Mar. 19, 2009, p. _; Mar. 25,
    2009, p. _; Mar. 30, 2009, p. _; Apr. 1, 2009, p. _; May 12, 2009, p. _;
    July 22, 2009, p. _) and alleging an inadequate investigation into such
    allegations by the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct (now
    Ethics), and directing the committee to report on the extent of said
    investigation (Mar. 18, 2010, p. _; Mar. 25, 2010, p. _; Apr. 15, 2010,
    p. _; Apr. 22, 2010, p. _); (26) alleging improper involvement of
    Members with a certain lobbying organization, and directing the
    Committee on Standards of Official Conduct to report any action it has
    taken with respect thereto (June 3, 2009, p. _); (27) alleging improper
    conduct by a former Member with regard to various House staff and
    insufficient response thereto by House leadership, and directing the
    Committee on Standards of Official Conduct (now Ethics) to establish a
    subcommittee to investigate the circumstances surrounding the former
    Member's misconduct and the responses thereto and to issue a report
    thereon (Mar. 11, 2010, p. _; April 14, 2010, p. _). On the other hand,
    a resolution alleging inconsistency between statements of the Speaker
    and of an intelligence agency and commissioning an investigation of

    [[Page 415]]

    the accuracy of her statements, where such investigation would
    extend beyond the conduct of a Member and necessarily involve a review
    of the agency itself, was held not to constitute a question of the
    privileges of the House (May 21, 2009, p. _; June 16, 2009, p. _).

    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.
    22734); (14) alleging, among other things, the improper and unilateral
    firing of nonpartisan staff of the Committee on Standards of Official
    Conduct and directing the Speaker to appoint a bipartisan task force to
    address the efficacy of that committee so as to restore public
    confidence in the ethics process (Mar. 15, 2005, pp. 4657, 4658; Apr.
    14, 2005, pp. 6399, 6400) and directing the committee to appoint
    nonpartisan professional staff (June 9, 2005, pp. 12025, 12026); (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

      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.

    [[Page 416]]

    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);
    (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); (7) authorizing
    an officer of the House to release certain documents in response to
    another such request from the Special Counsel (May 28, 1992, p. 12790).
    The latter category included resolutions: (1) directing the Committee on
    House Administration to conduct a thorough investigation of the
    operation and management of the Office of the Postmaster in light of
    recent press allegations of wrongdoing (Feb. 5, 1992, p. 1589); (2)
    creating a select committee to investigate the same matter (Feb. 5,
    1992, p. 1599); (3) requiring an explanation of a reported interference
    with authorized access to a committee investigation of that matter (Apr.
    9, 1992, p. 9024); (4) redressing a perception of obstruction of justice
    by recusing the General Counsel to the Clerk from matters relating to
    the investigation of that matter (Apr. 9, 1992, p. 9076); (5) directing
    the Speaker to explain the lapse of time before the House received
    notice that several Members and an officer of the House had received
    subpoenas to testify before a Federal grand jury investigating that
    matter (May 14, 1992, p. 11309); (6) directing the Committee on House
    Administration to transmit to the Committee on Standards of Official
    Conduct and to the Department of Justice all records obtained by its
    task force to investigate that matter (July 22, 1992, p. 18786); (7)
    directing the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct to investigate
    violations of confidentiality by staff engaged in the investigation of
    that matter (July 22, 1992, p. 18795); (8) directing the Committee on
    House

      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); (3) the conduct of
    representatives of the press (II, 1630, 1631; III, 2627; VI, 553).

    [[Page 417]]

    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).
      Admission to the floor of the House constitutes a question of
    privilege (III, 2624-2626), including a resolution alleging indecorous
    behavior of a

      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 Record (Jan. 24, 1984, p. 250); (3) addressing
    whether the Record should constitute a verbatim transcript (May 8, 1985,
    p. 11072; Feb. 7, 1990, p. 1515); (4) alleging impropriety by a
    presiding officer and improper alteration of the Record, and directing
    that a select committee investigate and that the Record be corrected
    (Aug. 4, 2007, p. 23194). 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 a 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, pp. 25255, 25256).

    [[Page 418]]

    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, 2659-2664; VI, 587; Sept. 18, 1992, p. 25750; see
    also Sec. 291a, supra). Privileges of the House involving records also
    include resolutions: (1) furnishing certain requested information to an
    Independent Counsel investigating covert arms transactions with Iran
    (June 4, 1992, p. 13664); (2) responding to a request of a law
    enforcement official regarding the timing of the public release of
    official papers of the House (July 22, 1993, p. 16624); (3) directing a
    committee to investigate press publication of a report that the House
    had ordered not to be released (Speaker Albert, Feb. 19, 1976, p. 3914);
    (4) directing the public release of transcripts and other relevant
    documents relating to an investigation by the Committee on House
    Administration's task force to investigate the operation and management
    of the Office of the Postmaster unless two designees of the bipartisan
    leadership agreed to the contrary (June 9, 1994, p. 12437); (5) alleging
    that a Member willfully abused his power as chair 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

      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 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 chair
    of the committee to file a supplemental report to change those
    descriptions (May 3, 2005, pp. 8417, 8418); (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.
    1948); (5) alleging that known errors in the enrollment of a bill were
    ignored by the majority leadership after the President had transmitted
    to the House a return veto of the measure, admonishing the majority
    leadership for their roles therein, and directing the Committee on
    Standards of Official Conduct to investigate the abuse of power
    surrounding the inaccuracies (May 22, 2008, 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); (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.

    [[Page 419]]

    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 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

      Integrity in the conduct of a vote may involve a question of the
    privileges of the House, including resolutions: (1) 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 (Dec. 8, 2003, p. 32099), or
    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, pp. 27811, 27812); (2)
    directing the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct to review
    irregularities in the conduct of a vote in the House (Aug. 3, 2007, p.
    22746); (3) alleging irregularities in the conduct of a vote, directing
    House officers to preserve all records relating thereto, and
    establishing a select committee of investigation thereof (Aug. 3, 2007,
    p. 22768); (4) directing the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct
    and a previously-established select committee to investigate whether a
    vote was held open beyond a reasonable period of time for the purpose of
    circumventing the will of the House, and vacating such vote (Mar. 12,
    2008, p. _).

      A resolution alleging partiality in the manner of presiding by a
    Speaker pro tempore and stating that such actions bring dishonor and
    discredit on the House (Aug. 3, 2007, p. 22783) or alleging impropriety
    by a presiding officer, as well as alleging improper alteration of the
    Congressional Record and directing an investigation and correction
    thereof (Aug. 4, 2007, p. 23194), presents a question of the privileges
    of the House.

    [[Page 420]]

    of a committee intentionally violated House rules and abused his
    power as chair during a minority day of hearings under clause 2(j) of
    rule XI and directing the chair to schedule a further day of hearings
    (June 16, 2005, p. 12994); (4) alleging that the majority members of a
    committee wrongfully withheld a committee record from minority committee
    members (Jan. 24, 2007, p. 2139); (5) alleging that staff of the House
    Commission on Congressional Mailing Standards willfully applied
    different standards to submitted material on the basis of party and
    disapproving of the failure of the majority Members of that commission
    to ensure that staff executed their duties in a professional, fair, and
    impartial manner (July 29, 2009, p. _). However, 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.
      Alleged improprieties in committee procedures may give rise to
    questions of the privileges of the House, including resolutions: (1)
    alleging that the chair 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 chair 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 chair conducted the markup, and finding that
    the bill considered at that markup was not validly ordered reported
    (July 18, 2003, p. 18698) and resolving that the House disapproves of
    the manner in which the chair 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. 19171);
    (2) alleging, among other things, the improper and unilateral firing of
    nonpartisan staff of the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct and
    directing the Speaker to appoint a bipartisan task force to address the
    efficacy of that committee so as to restore public confidence in the
    ethics process (Mar. 15, 2005, pp. 4657, 4658; Apr. 14, 2005, pp. 6399,
    6400) and directing the committee to appoint nonpartisan professional
    staff (June 9, 2005, pp. 12025, 12026); (3) alleging that the chair

      A resolution alleging that a Member had interrupted an address by the
    President to a joint session of Congress by interjecting remarks, and
    disapproving of that behavior, presents a question of the privileges of
    the House (Sept. 15, 2009, p. _).

    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) or an insecure ceiling in the Hall (III, 2685); 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); and
    directing the Sergeant-at-Arms to ensure that House personnel are
    alerted to the dangers of electronic security breaches on computer and
    information systems (June 11, 2008, p. _).

    [[Page 421]]

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

    [[Page 422]]

    impeachment of the President in contravention of statutory law and
    the Rules of the House was held to be tantamount to a 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 the discretionary
    power of rec

    [[Page 423]]

      A question of the privileges of the House may not be invoked to
    prescribe a special order of business for the House, because otherwise
    any Member would be able to attach privilege to a legislative measure
    merely by alleging impact on the dignity of the House based upon House
    action or inaction (June 27, 1974, p. 21596; Feb. 7, 1995, p. 3905; Dec.
    22, 1995, p. 38501; Jan. 3, 1996, p. 40; Jan. 24, 1996, p. 1248; Feb. 1,
    1996, p. 2245; Oct. 10, 1998, p. 25420; Nov. 4, 1999, pp. 28528-33; June
    6, 2002, p. 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; June 25, 2009, p. _ (sustained by tabling of appeal);
    July 9, 2009, p. _ (sustained by tabling of appeal); July 23, 2009, p. _
    (sustained by tabling of appeal)); (2) a resolution amending a special
    order of business resolution (July 17, 2009, p. _ (sustained by tabling
    of appeal); July 24, 2009, p. _ (sustained by tabling of appeal)); (3) 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) or exhorting it to do so
    (Mar. 11, 2008, p. _ (sustained by tabling of appeal)); (4) a resolution
    precluding an adjournment of the House until a specified legislative
    measure is considered (Feb. 1, 1996, p. 2247; Mar. 13, 2008, p. _
    (sustained by tabling of appeal)) or precluding an assembly during a
    specified post-election period (Aug. 10, 2010, p. _ (sustained by
    tabling of appeal); Sept. 23, 2010, p. _ (sustained by tabling of
    appeal)). See also Sec. 702, supra, for a discussion of legislative
    propositions purporting to present questions of the privileges of the
    House.

    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 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).

      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(k)(1) of rule X'') (VI, 395).

    [[Page 424]]

    relate to the Member's representative capacity
    (III, 1828-1830, 2716; VI, 604, 612; VIII, 2479), but not when they
    relate to conduct at a time before such person became a Member (II,
    1287; III, 2691, 2723, 2725). Although 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
    (because 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). Although 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 such Member was properly
    participating, such Member may not raise a question of personal
    privilege merely to complain that microphones had been turned off during
    disorderly conduct following expiration of 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. 1625).

    Sec. 708. Questions of personal privilege.

      The  privilege of
    the Member rests primarily on the Constitution, which grants conditional
    immunity from arrest (Sec. 90, supra) and an unconditional freedom of
    debate in the House (III, 2670, Sec. 92, supra). 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 in
    matters 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

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

    [[Page 425]]

    Standards of Official Conduct of her, including disciplinary action
    taken by the committee against professional staff assigned to the case
    (Dec. 9, 2010, p. _).
      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. 8691; May 10, 2005, p. 9094); (3)
    allegations that he had used procedural tactics to disrupt a memorial
    service in the Rotunda for a late Member (Feb. 14, 2008, p. _); (4) a
    ``Dear Colleague'' alleging willful violation of the rules of the
    Committee on Standards of Official Conduct by its ranking minority
    member (Mar. 12, 2008, p. _); (5) allegations that he accepted an
    appointment from the administration in exchange for certain votes (Mar.
    19, 2010, p. _); (6) a pending investigation by the Committee on

      A committee chair rose to a question of personal privilege: (1) based
    on press accounts concerning allegations by other Members that he had
    been ``buying votes'' (Mar. 26, 1998, p. 4851); (2) 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); (3) 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);
    (4) 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. 19171); (5) based on press accounts regarding the receipt of illegal
    gifts and campaign contributions (July 31, 2008, p. _) and violations of
    federal tax law (Sept. 10, 2008, p. _) and a statement of alleged
    violations by the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct regarding
    those accusations (Aug. 10, 2010, p. _).

      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; Mar. 12, 2008, p. _), 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. 5763; July 21, 2009, p. _) or conveyed by an exhibit in debate
    (June 28, 2000, p. 12723). However, a Member may raise a question of
    personal privilege based upon press accounts of another Member's
    remarks, in debate or off the floor, that impugn his character or
    motives (May 15, 1984, pp. 12207, 12211; May 31, 1984, p. 14620),
    newspaper accounts of televised press coverage of a committee hearing at
    which he was criticized derogatorily (Mar. 3, 1988, p. 3196), or press
    accounts arraigning personally offensive remarks a Member had made in
    debate regarding the President (Oct. 23, 2007, p. 27967).

    [[Page 426]]

    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 this rule 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. 14600), 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 (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 (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). Although 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 the 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, because such unanimous-consent requests, if granted,
    temporarily waive the standing Rules of the House relating to the order
    of business (Speaker O'Neill, July 10, 1985, p. 18394; Feb. 6, 1989, pp.
    1676-82).

      A Member's announcement of intent to offer a resolution as a question
    of privilege may take precedence over a special order reported from the
    Committee on Rules; but, if 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).

    [[Page 427]]

    562). Although 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).

      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,

    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 offer 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 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 a demand that words be taken down
    pursuant to clause 4 of rule XVI; 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
    before conferring recognition for a question of personal privilege (Jan.
    18, 2007, p. 1625).

    <>   Whenever
    it is asserted on the floor that the privileges of the House are
    invaded, the Speaker entertains the question (II, 1501), and may then
    refuse recognition if the resolution is not admissible as a question of
    privilege under the rule. A proper question of privilege may be renewed
    (Nov. 17, 1995, p. 33846). Although the early custom was for the Speaker
    to submit to the House the question whether a resolution involved the
    privileges of the House (III, 2718), the modern practice is for the
    Speaker to rule directly on the question (VI, 604; Speaker Wright, Mar.
    11, 1987, p. 5404; Feb. 3, 1995, p. 3571; Feb. 7, 1995, p. 3905),
    subject to appeal where appropriate (Speaker Albert, June 27, 1974, p.
    21596). In raising a question of personal privilege, a Member in the
    first instance must apprise the Chair of the grounds on which
    recognition may be conferred (Deschler, ch. 11, Sec. 21.1; Sept. 10,
    2008, p. _).

    [[Page 428]]

    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
    has discretion to 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 (Speaker Foley, Feb. 3, 1993, p. 1974); and
    is not required to announce the time designated to consider a resolution
    at the time the resolution is noticed (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 called up (Feb. 11, 1994,
    p. 2209; Sept. 13, 1994, p. 24389; Feb. 3, 1995, p. 3571).

    [[Page 429]]

    to debate such resolution (Nov. 3, 2005, pp. 24757,
    24758). Remarks uttered while not under recognition for debate do not
    render untimely a motion before debate to lay on the table a resolution
    offered under this rule (Aug. 3, 2007, p. 22783). end segment .006
    segment .007 -- rule X

      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 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. 27812). 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. 21334); a separate hour of debate on the resolution, itself,
    under clause 2 of rule XVII (formerly clause 2 of rule XIV); and a
    motion to commit (not debatable after the ordering of the previous
    question) under clause 2 of rule XIX (formerly clause 1 of rule XVII)
    (Mar. 12, 1992, p. 5557). Debate on a letter of resignation is
    controlled by the Member moving the acceptance of the resignation (Mar.
    8, 1977, pp. 6579-82) if the resigning Member does not seek recognition
    (June 16, 1975, p. 19054; June 8, 2006, p. 10498). 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

                                     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:

      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 number of standing committees grew over time with
    the creation of the Committee on Science and Astronautics (now Science,
    Space, and Technology), established on July 21, 1958 (p. 14513); the
    Committee on Standards of Official Conduct (now Ethics), 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).

    [[Page 430]]

    Natural Resources, Transportation and Infrastructure
    (formerly Public Works and Transportation), Armed Services (National
    Security during the 104th and 105th Congresses), and Science, Space, and
    Technology (Science during the 104th through 109th Congresses) (sec.
    202(a), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 464). The 109th Congress established
    the Committee on Homeland Security (sec. 2(a), H. Res. 5, Jan. 4, 2005,
    p. 42).
      The 104th Congress reduced the 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

      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, that 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) and 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 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), and the size and
    ratio of the Committee on Ethics (clause 5(a)(3)(A) of rule X), as well
    as the size and preferred composition of the Permanent Select Committee
    on Intelligence (clause 11(a) of rule X).

      The Speaker refers public bills in accordance with clause 1 of rule X,
    but when the House itself refers a bill it may send it to any committee
    without regard to the rules of jurisdiction (IV, 4375; V, 5527; VII,
    2131) and jurisdiction is thereby conferred (IV, 4362-4364; VII, 2105).
    Motions for change of reference of public bills and resolutions must be
    authorized by the committee claiming jurisdiction (clause 7 of rule XII;
    VII, 2121; Feb. 13, 1918, p. 2070; Jan. 10, 1941, p. 100), must be made
    immediately following the reading of the Journal (VII, 1809, 2119,
    2120), must apply to a single bill and not to a class of bills (VII,
    2125), 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).

    [[Page 431]]

    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).
      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

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

      (a) Committee on Agriculture.

    Sec. 715. Agriculture.

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

          (2) Agriculture generally.

          (3) Agricultural and industrial chemistry.

          (4) Agricultural colleges and experiment stations.

          (5) Agricultural economics and research.

    [[Page 432]]

          (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.

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

    [[Page 433]]

    diction 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 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
    (CCC)) 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 limited juris

      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. 14304).

      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. 4926). The committee 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); 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).

    [[Page 434]]

      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 435]]

    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 clause 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 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

      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), 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.

          (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.

    [[Page 436]]

          (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.

          (16) Cemeteries administered by the Department of Defense.

    [[Page 437]]

    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 jurisdiction
    over appropriations from 1885 to 1920 (IV, 4179, 4189; VII, 1741). The
    committee was redesignated the Committee on National Security in the
    104th Congress (sec. 202(a), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 464) and was
    redesignated again the Committee on Armed Services in the 106th Congress
    (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). Clerical and stylistic changes were
    effected when the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress,
    including the deletion

      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 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 112th Congress added subparagraph (16), a matter formerly within the
    sole jurisdiction of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs (sec. 2(e)(6),
    H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 2011, p. _).

      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 military medical facilities
    (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).

      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.

    [[Page 438]]

    levels of budget totals for the United States
    Government.

    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

          (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(c) 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 439]]

    tration 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 chair 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 the budget (Feb. 13, 2001, p.
    1817).

      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). In the 104th
    Congress, the House amended the 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 seques

      (e) Committee on Education and the Workforce.

          (1) Child labor.

    [[Page 440]]

    Sec. 720. Education and the Workforce.

            (2) Gallaudet
    University and Howard University and Hospital.

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

          (4) Food programs for children in schools.

          (5) Labor standards and statistics.

          (6) Education or labor generally.

          (7) Mediation and arbitration of labor disputes.

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

          (9) Workers' compensation.

          (10) Vocational rehabilitation.

          (11) Wages and hours of labor.

          (12) Welfare of miners.

          (13) Work incentive programs.

      This committee was established 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), was redesignated
    the Committee on Education and Labor in the 110th Congress (sec. 212(a),
    H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 2007, p. 19), and was redesignated as the Committee
    on Education and the Workforce in the 112th Congress (sec. 2(e)(7), H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 5, 2011, p. _).

    [[Page 441]]

    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 function was inserted in clause 3(c) of rule X
    (current clause 3(d) of rule X) (H. Res. 988, 93d Cong., Oct. 8, 1974,
    p. 34470). Clerical and stylistic changes were effected when the House
    recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, including the deletion of
    obsolete references to the Columbia Institution for the Deaf, Dumb, and
    Blind, Freedmen's Hospital, and the

      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 the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare (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 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. This committee, and
    not also the Committees on Oversight and Government Reform and House
    Administration, has jurisdiction over a bill amending the Family and
    Medical Leave Act of 1993 to address only private-sector employees (Oct.
    30, 2007, p. 28651).

      (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 442]]

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

          (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 443]]

    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 was changed from Interstate and Foreign Commerce to Commerce
    and Health. Effective January 14, 1975, it was redesignated as
    Interstate and

    [[Page 444]]

    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, Space, and
    Technology), while the Committee on Energy and Commerce obtained
    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 the two committees 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. 71).
      In the 74th Congress the jurisdictional statement of the committee was
    amended to include jurisdiction over bills relating to radio, and to
    transfer jurisdiction over water transportation, Coast Guard, lifesaving
    service, lighthouses, lightships, ocean derelicts, Coast and Geodetic
    Survey, and the Panama Canal to 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, Space, 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.
    (15)), health and health facilities, except health care supported by
    payroll deductions (subpara. (3)) (a matter formerly within the
    jurisdiction of the Committee on Ways and Means), and biomedical
    research and development (subpara. (1)), and was released of
    jurisdiction over civil aeronautics to the Committee on Public Works and
    Transportation (now Transportation and Infrastructure), jurisdiction
    over civil aviation research and development, energy and environmental
    research and development, and the National Weather Service to the
    Committee on Science and Technology (now Science, Space, 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 relating to conservation of energy resources (subpara. (7)),
    measures relating to energy information generally (subpara. (8)),
    measures relating to the

      The committee has the special oversight responsibility under clause
    3(e) 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
    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.

      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).
    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).

    [[Page 445]]

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

      Before the 104th Congress the committee considered bills regulating
    railroads in their interstate commerce relations (IV, 414) and exercised
    juris

      (g) Committee on Ethics.

          The Code of Official Conduct.

    [[Page 446]]

    ing 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). In the 112th
    Congress it was redesignated as the Committee on Ethics (sec. 2(e)(8),
    H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 2011, p. _).

    Sec. 721b. Ethics.

      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
    devolv

      Three 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, rule XXV,
    limitations on outside earned income and acceptance of gifts, and rule
    XXVII, disclosure of employment negotiations.

      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 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 447]]

    allowances and franking, casework considerations,
    campaign financing and practices, and involvement with official and
    unofficial organizations.
      The committee has compiled statutory and rule-based ethical standards
    in the House Ethics Manual (110th 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

    Sec. 721c. 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).

      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 (Ethics) 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).

      For Office of Congressional Ethics, see Sec. 1125h, infra.

      (h) Committee on Financial Services.

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

    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.

    [[Page 448]]

          (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 449]]

    107th Congress jurisdiction over securities
    and exchanges was transferred from the Committee on Energy and Commerce
    to this committee (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 this committee 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. 71). 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 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,
    Space, 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 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

      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. 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).

      (i) 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.

    [[Page 450]]

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

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

          (5) Foreign loans.

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

          (7) International conferences and congresses.

          (8) International education.

          (9) Intervention abroad and declarations of war.

          (10) Diplomatic service.

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

          (12) International economic policy.

          (13) Neutrality.

          (14) Protection of American citizens abroad and expatriation.

          (15) The American National Red Cross.

          (16) Trading with the enemy.

          (17) United Nations organizations.

      This committee was established in 1822 (IV, 4162), and from 1885 to
    1920 had authority to report appropriations. In the 94th Congress the
    name of the committee was changed from Foreign Affairs to International
    Relations (H. Res. 163, Mar. 19, 1975, p. 7343). In the 96th Congress it
    was changed back to Foreign Affairs (H. Res. 89, Feb. 5, 1979, p. 1848).
    In the 104th Congress the name was again changed to International
    Relations (sec. 202(a), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 464). In the 110th
    Congress it was changed back to Foreign Affairs (sec. 213(a), H. Res. 6,
    Jan. 4, 2007, p. 19).

    [[Page 451]]

    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).
      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

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

    [[Page 452]]

    cised 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 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 the Workforce) has exer

      The special oversight function of the committee set forth in clause
    3(f) 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).

      (j) Committee on Homeland Security.

    Sec. 723a. Homeland
    Security.

          (1) Overall homeland  security policy.

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

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

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

              (B) Customs (except customs revenue).

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

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

              (E) Research and development.

              (F) Transportation security.

      This committee was established in the 109th Congress (sec. 2(a), H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 4, 2005, p. 42). For debate (and material submitted during
    debate) that may edify the reader on the jurisdictional issues
    surrounding the new committee, see January 4, 2005, pp. 60 0962. The
    Speaker announced that the 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. 71).

    [[Page 453]]

    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.

    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

      (k) Committee on House Administration.

    Sec. 724. House Administration.

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

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

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

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

    [[Page 454]]

          (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.

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

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

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

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

    [[Page 455]]

    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).
      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),

      The committee was redesignated as the Committee on House Oversight in
    the 104th Congress, obtaining from the former Committee on Post Office
    and Civil Service jurisdiction over the Franking Commission (also known
    as the House Commission on Congressional Mailing Standards) in
    subparagraph (7), while transferring to the Committee on Resources (now
    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 (now Ethics) (subpara.
    (15)), and over compensation, retirement, and other benefits of Members,
    officers, and employees of Congress (subpara. (16)) (H. Res. 5, Jan. 14,
    1975, p. 20).

    [[Page 456]]

      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 Transportation (now Transportation and
    Infrastructure). The House Members of the Joint Committee on the
    Library, provided for by law (2 U.S.C. 132b), are elected by resolution
    each Congress.

    Sec. 728. Congressional Record.

      The  Committee has
    jurisdiction over matters relating to printing and correction of the
    Congressional Record, formerly within the jurisdiction of the erstwhile
    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.

      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).

      (l) 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.

    [[Page 457]]

          (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.

          (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.

    [[Page 458]]

    sive 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. 42). For debate (and material submitted during debate)
    that may edify the reader on the jurisdictional issues surrounding the
    creation of the Committee on Homeland Security, see January 4, 2005, pp.
    60 0962. In the 109th Congress the House added subparagraph (7) (sec.
    2(a)(2), H. Res. 5, Jan. 4, 2005, p. 42).
      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 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 subver

      Under subparagraph (15) the committee has jurisdiction over
    Presidential nominations to fill vacancies in the Office of Vice
    President, submitted pursuant to the 25th amendment to the Constitution
    (Oct. 13, 1973, p. 34032; Aug. 20, 1974, p. 29366). The committee has
    reported Articles of Impeachment of the President (Aug. 20, 1974, pp.
    29219-81; Dec. 17, 1998, p. 27819). If 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).

    [[Page 459]]

    moval 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).
      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 (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 flag (IV, 4055), bankruptcy (IV, 4065),
    re

      The committee also has jurisdiction over joint resolutions proposing
    amendments to the Constitution (IV, 4056; VII, 1779). Although the
    committee has historically exercised jurisdiction over lobbying
    activities, the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct (now Ethics)
    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).

      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 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 sole jurisdiction over the Legal
    Services Corporation (Nov. 19, 1975, p. 37288). The committee has
    exercised jurisdiction, with the Committee on Education and Labor (now
    Education and the Workforce), over bills to amend the Walsh-Healey Act
    regarding hours of work under government contracts (May 15, 1985, p.
    11946). This committee, and not the Committee on Public Works and
    Transportation (now Transportation and Infrastructure), exercised
    jurisdiction over a bill extending the authority for the Marshal of the
    Supreme Court and the Supreme Court Police to protect the Chief Justice,
    Associate Justices, officers, and employees of the Supreme Court beyond
    its building and grounds (Nov. 22, 1993, p. 32074). The Committee on
    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. 5348).

    [[Page 460]]

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

      (m) 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.

          (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.

    [[Page 461]]

          (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.

          (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. 19).

    [[Page 462]]

    to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs
    in the 90th Congress (H. Res. 241, Oct. 20, 1967).
      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 (now Education and the Workforce).
    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

      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.

      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 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).

    [[Page 463]]

    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 the Workforce,
    and not this committee, has jurisdiction over a bill amending the Native
    American Programs Act of 1974 (an Indian education matter) (Oct. 30,
    1997, p. 23967). This committee, and not the Committee on Agriculture,
    has jurisdiction over a bill to convey land that is part of a National
    Forest created from the public domain (Mar. 23, 2004, p. 4926). 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. 14755). This committee, and not
    the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, has jurisdiction
    over a bill addressing a federal water project operated by the Bureau of
    Reclamation (June 25, 2007, p. 17128).
      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 created out of the public
    domain (IV, 4197, 4199), including measures relating to criminal
    trespass provisions applying only within national forests created from
    the public domain (July 18, 1977, p. 23434); admission of States (IV,
    4208); preservation of prehistoric ruins and objects of interest on the
    public domain (IV, 4199); and 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

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

      (n) Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.

    [[Page 464]]

    the United States, including their
    compensation, classification, and retirement.

    Sec. 732. Oversight and Government Reform.

          (1)  Federal
    civil service, including intergovernmental personnel; and the status of
    officers and employees of

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

          (3) Federal paperwork reduction.

          (4) Government management and accounting measures generally.

          (5) Holidays and celebrations.

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

          (7) National archives.

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

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

          (10) Public information and records.

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

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

      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 to Government Reform (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p.
    47), and in the 110th Congress to Oversight and Government Reform (sec.
    215(a), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 2007, p. 19). 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 465]]

    ments 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 (subpara. (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 this committee retains programmatic
    jurisdiction over that Fund); (2) the Committee on the Budget has
    primary jurisdiction over a bill excluding from the budget the Highway
    Trust Fund, the Airport and Airway Trust Fund, the Inland Waterways
    Trust Fund, and the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund (although the
    Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure retains programmatic
    jurisdiction); and (3) the Committee on the Budget has secondary
    jurisdiction over a bill amending title 49 of the United States Code and
    providing off-budget treatment for the Highway Trust Fund, the Airport
    and Airway Trust Fund, the Inland Waterways Trust Fund, and the Harbor
    Maintenance Trust Fund (Dec. 6, 1995, p. 35572). The committee was also
    released from jurisdiction over measures relating to 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).

    [[Page 466]]

      In addition to the jurisdiction vested in the Committee by the
    Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946 (60 Stat. 812), the Committee
    Reform Amend

      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 adjustment for administrative law judges (July
    31, 1991, p. 20677; June 10, 1999, p. 12435).

    [[Page 467]]

      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.

      (o) 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 paragraph 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).

      The Speaker was first made a member of the committee in 1858 (IV,
    4321), and ceased to be a member on March 19, 1910 (VII, 2047). However,
    the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946 deleted from the former rule
    the prohibition against the Speaker serving on the committee. The size
    of the committee was increased from 12 to 15 members for the 87th
    Congress (Jan. 31, 1961, p. 1589), and the increase in the committee's
    size was incorporated as a part of the rules in the 88th Congress (Jan.
    9, 1963, p. 14). Effective January 3, 1975, however, the rules were
    amended to 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).

    [[Page 468]]

    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 (now Ethics) on April 3, 1968 (H. Res.
    1099, 90th Cong.), but in the 95th Congress, jurisdiction over rules
    relating to financial disclosure by Members, officers, and employees of
    the House was returned to this committee (H. Res. 5, Jan. 4, 1977, pp.
    53-70).
      The 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

      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 chair 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 in the 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 to provide that a subject be made a special order by way of 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).

    [[Page 469]]

    tion to rescind a special order is not privileged under
    the rules regulating the order of business (IV, 3173, 3174; V, 5323).
      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 mo

      A motion to amend the Rules of the House does not present a question
    of privilege (VIII, 3377, overruling VIII, 3376; see also 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 chair (in the temporary absence of the chair)
    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-
    863, infra.

      (p) Committee on Science, Space, and Technology.

    Sec. 735. Science, Space, 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.

          (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.

    [[Page 470]]

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

          (13) Science scholarships.

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

      The standing Committee on Science and Astronautics was established in
    the 85th Congress and given jurisdiction formerly vested in a Select
    Committee on Astronautics and Space Exploration established a few months
    earlier (Mar. 5, 1958, p. 3443), as well as the former jurisdiction of
    the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce (now Energy and
    Commerce) over the Bureau of Standards (now the National Institute of
    Standards and Technology) and science scholarships (July 21, 1958, p.
    14513). By the Committee Reform Amendments of 1974, effective January 3,
    1975, the committee was redesignated as the Committee on Science and
    Technology and given additional jurisdiction over civil aviation
    research and development, environmental research and development,
    nonnuclear energy research and development, and the National Weather
    Service (now part of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
    Administration) (H. Res. 988, 93d Cong., Oct. 8, 1974, p. 34470). At the
    same time the committee was given the general and special oversight
    functions set forth in clause 2(b) and former clause 3(f) (current
    clause 3(k)). When the House abolished the Joint Committee on Atomic
    Energy in the 95th Congress, this committee was given jurisdiction over
    nuclear research and development as well (H. Res. 5, Jan. 4, 1977, pp.
    53-70). Its jurisdiction over energy research and development (now
    subpara. (1)) was amended in the 96th Congress, effective January 3,
    1981, to specifically include energy demonstration projects and
    federally owned nonmilitary energy laboratories (H. Res. 549, Mar. 25,
    1980, pp. 6405-10). In the 100th Congress, the committee was
    redesignated as the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology (H. Res.
    5, Jan. 6, 1987, p. 6). In the 103d Congress the 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. 19) and the 112th Congress redesignated it
    the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology (sec. 2(e)(9), H. Res.
    5, Jan. 5, 2011, p. _).

    [[Page 471]]

    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).

      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

      (q) Committee on Small Business.

    Sec. 736. Small Business.

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

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

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

    [[Page 472]]

      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).

      (r) Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.

    Sec. 739. Transportation and Infrastructure.

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

          (2) Federal management of emergencies and natural disasters.

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

          (4) Inland waterways.

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

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

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

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

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

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

          (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).

    [[Page 473]]

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

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

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

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

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

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

          (19) Roads and the safety thereof.

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

          (21) Water power.

    [[Page 474]]

    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 matters from the
    Committee on Energy and Commerce; and adding subparagraph (2) and
    inserting the reference to inland, coastal, and ocean waters in
    subparagraph (14), as clarifying consolidations of formerly
    fractionalized subjects (sec. 202(a), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 464).
    Clerical and stylistic changes were effected when the House recodified
    its rules in the 106th Congress. The 106th Congress also adopted a
    substantive amendment to this provision deleting the prohibition against
    including a provision for a specific road in a bill providing for
    another specific road or in a general road bill (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6,
    1999, p. 47). In the 109th Congress the House established the Committee
    on Homeland Security (sec. 2(a), H. Res. 5, Jan. 4, 2005, p. 42). 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, pp. 60 0962.
      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

    [[Page 475]]

    tion 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, 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
    Administrations (July 2, 1959, p. 12629); directing the Secretary of the
    Army to provide school facilities for dependents of Corps of Engineers
    construction workers (June 17, 1968, p. 17429); conveying Corps of
    Engineers flood-control project lands (July 15, 1965, p. 17002), 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 Competi

      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 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 (now
    Education and the Workforce) over bills providing labor protections to
    workers, including airline employees, in the transportation industry
    (June 24, 1991, p. 16020; Feb. 24, 1993, p. 3577).

    [[Page 476]]

      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 477]]

      This committee was established January 2, 1947, as a part of the
    Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946 (60 Stat. 812), and was vested
    with jurisdiction formerly exercised by the Committees on World War
    Veterans' Legislation (VII, 2077); Invalid Pensions (IV, 4258); and
    Pensions (IV, 4260). Jurisdiction over veterans' cemeteries administered
    by the Department of Defense was transferred from the Committee on
    Interior and Insular Affairs (now Natural Resources) in the 90th
    Congress (H. Res. 241, Oct. 20, 1967, p. 29560), a matter now shared
    with the Committee on Armed Services. Vocational rehabilitation, except
    that pertaining to veterans, is under the jurisdiction of the Committee
    on Education and the Workforce. The committee has jurisdiction over
    bills to amend the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act 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. 44).

      (t) Committee on Ways and Means.

    Sec. 741. Ways and Means.

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

          (2) Reciprocal trade agreements.

          (3) Revenue measures generally.

          (4) Revenue measures relating to insular possessions.

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

          (6) Deposit of public monies.

          (7) Transportation of dutiable goods.

          (8) Tax exempt foundations and charitable trusts.

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

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

    [[Page 478]]

    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).
      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 (now Education and the Workforce); and jurisdiction over
    renegotiation to the Committee on Banking, Finance and Urban Affairs
    (now Financial Services) (H. Res. 988, 93d Cong., Oct. 8, 1974, p.
    34470). The Committee Reform

      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. 42), which
    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, pp. 60 0962.

      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 oil spill and hazardous waste trust funds in the
    Treasury, funded by assessments on all quantities of oil, petrochemical
    feedstocks, and other hazardous substances offered for sale, where the
    scope and size of the funds and the method of assessment (similar to an
    excise tax) represented the collection of general revenue to fund
    particular Federal activities, a type of financing mechanism over which
    the Ways and Means Committee has traditionally exercised jurisdiction
    (May 20, 1980, p. 11862).

    [[Page 479]]

    structure, and not this
    committee, has jurisdiction over a bill to designate a customs
    administrative building (Dec. 12, 1995, p. 36165). The Committee on the
    Budget, and not this committee, has jurisdiction over a bill
    establishing a rule of sequestration under the Balanced Budget and
    Emergency Deficit Control Act (Dec. 15, 2000, p. 27085). The Committee
    on the Budget has primary jurisdiction, and this committee has
    additional jurisdiction, over a bill taking Social Security trust funds
    off budget (Dec. 15, 2000, p. 27085).
      The committee has jurisdiction over subjects relating to the Treasury
    of the United States and the deposit of the public moneys (IV, 4028),
    but it failed to make good a claim to the subjects of ``national
    finances'' and ``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 Infra

      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).

    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

    [[Page 480]]

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

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

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

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

          (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.

    [[Page 481]]

    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.

    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

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

      (d)(1) Not later than February 15 of the first session of a Congress,
    each standing committee shall, in a meeting that is open to the public
    and with a quorum present, adopt its oversight plan for that Congress.
    Such plan shall be submitted simultaneously to the Committee on
    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;

    [[Page 482]]

          (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;

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

          (F) include proposals to cut or eliminate programs, including
    mandatory spending programs, that are inefficient, duplicative,
    outdated, or more appropriately administered by State or local
    governments.

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

      (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]]

    tion, 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). Oversight responsibilities are also
    contained in section 190d of title 2, United States Code. 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 a
    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 104th Congress also added paragraph (e) (sec.
    203(a), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 467). The 106th Congress deleted a
    provision added in the 104th Congress making consideration of
    resolutions funding each committee contingent on submission of its
    oversight plans to the committees specified; deleted the exception for
    the Budget Committee from the general oversight responsibilities listed
    in clause 2(b); effected clerical corrections to conform references to a
    renamed committee; and effected clerical and stylistic changes when the
    House recodified its rules (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). Clause
    2(d)(1)(B) was added in the 107th Congress (sec. 2(e), H. Res. 5, Jan.
    3, 2001, p. 25). Clause 2(d)(1)(E) was added in the 109th Congress (sec.
    2(b), H. Res. 5, Jan. 4, 2005, pp. 42, 43) and clause 2(d)(1)(F) was
    added in the 112th Congress (sec. 2(c)(11), H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 2011, p.
    _). Paragraph (d) was amended in the 110th Congress to reflect a change
    in committee name (sec. 215(b), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 2007, p. 19).

    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 jurisdic

    [[Page 484]]

    States) as it considers necessary to assist it
    in the determination of matters within its jurisdiction.

    744. Special oversight.

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

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

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

    [[Page 485]]

      (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)(1) 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.

      (2) In addition, the committee shall review and study on a primary and
    continuing basis all Government activities, programs, and organizations
    related to homeland security that fall within its primary legislative
    jurisdiction.

      (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.

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

    [[Page 486]]

      (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 487]]

    2005, p. 42). Paragraph (g)(2) was added in the 111th
    Congress (sec. 2(b), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, 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. 19; H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 5, 2011, p. _). Clerical and stylistic changes were effected when
    the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, including the
    transfer to this clause of oversight functions of the Committees on
    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)(1) (sec. 2(a), H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 4,

    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 chair 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 chair 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.

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

    [[Page 488]]

    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.

    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,

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

    -  (2) <> Pursuant to section 401(b)(2) of the Congressional
    Budget Act of 1974, when a committee reports a bill or joint resolution
    that provides new entitlement authority as defined in section 3(9) of
    that Act, and enactment of the bill or joint resolution, as reported,
    would cause a breach of the committee's pertinent allocation of new
    budget authority under section 302(a) of that Act, the bill or joint
    resolution may be referred to the Committee on Appropriations with
    in

    [[Page 489]]

    structions 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.

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

    [[Page 490]]

    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).

      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),

    Sec. 747a. Former Select Intelligence Oversight
    Panel.

      A former  subparagraph (5) added in the 110th Congress established a
    Select Intelligence Oversight Panel of the Committee on Appropriations
    to review budget requests for and execution of intelligence activities
    (H. Res. 35, Jan. 9, 2007, p. 567). It was abolished in the 112th
    Congress (sec. 2(e)(10), H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 2011, p. _).

      (b) The Committee on the Budget shall--

    Sec. 748. Budget.

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

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

    [[Page 491]]

          (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.

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

    Sec. 749. Oversight and Government Reform.

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

    [[Page 492]]

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

          (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]]

      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). Clerical and
    stylistic changes were effected when the House recodified its rules in
    the 106th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). Under section 2954
    of title 5, United States Code, an executive agency, if so requested by
    this committee or any seven members thereof, shall submit any
    information requested of it relating to any matter within the
    jurisdiction of the committee.

    Sec. 749a. Deposition authority.

      (3)(A)  The Committee
    on Oversight and Government Reform may adopt a rule authorizing 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).

      (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;

          (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; and

          (iii) shall, unless waived by the deponent, require the attendance
    of a member of the committee.

      (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.

      This subparagraph was added in the 110th Congress (sec. 502, H. Res.
    6, Jan. 4, 2007, p. 19 (adopted Jan. 5, 2007)). Subdivision (A)(iii) was
    added in the 112th Congress (sec. 2(e)(14), H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 2011, p.
    _). Other committees have been granted such authority for specific
    investigations (Dec. 5, 2007, p. _; sec. 4(f), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009,
    p. _; May 20, 2010, p. _).

    [[Page 494]]

    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;

      (B) oversee the management of services provided to the House by the
    Architect of the Capitol, except those services that lie within the
    jurisdiction of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure under
    clause 1(r);

    Sec. 753. Acceptance of gifts.

      (C)  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;

      (D) promulgate regulations to carry out subdivision (C); and

      (E) establish and maintain standards for making documents publicly
    available in electronic form by the House and its committees.

    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 chair and
    ranking minority member of the Committee on House Administration
    concerning the amount of such payment.

    [[Page 495]]

    visions were added by section 10 of the House Administrative
    Reform Resolution of 1992 (H. Res. 423, 102d Cong., Apr. 9, 1992, p.
    9040) to ensure the orderly transfer of functions and entities from
    elected officers to the Director of Non-legislative and Financial
    Services and to provide for policy direction and oversight of certain
    administrative officials and elected officers. However, in the 107th
    Congress the House 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). In the 111th Congress a new
    subparagraph (1)(B) was inserted regarding the Architect of the Capitol
    (and existing subparagraphs (1)(B) and (1)(C) were redesignated) (sec.
    2(c), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, p. _). In the 112th Congress subparagraph
    (E) was added (sec. 2(c), H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 2011, p. _). 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 duty of the committee 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
    pro

    [[Page 496]]

    of Columbia will be made annually to the
    maximum extent feasible and consistent with the nature, requirement, and
    objective of the programs and activities involved. In this subparagraph
    programs and activities of the Federal Government and the government of
    the District of Columbia includes programs and activities of any
    department, agency, establishment, wholly owned Government corporation,
    or instrumentality of the Federal Government or of the government of the
    District of Columbia.

    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

      (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 submission of the budget by the President, or at such
    time as the Committee on the Budget may request--

    [[Page 497]]

    year that are within its jurisdiction or functions; and
          (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

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

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

    [[Page 498]]

    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), renumbered in the
    110th Congress as rule XXVIII (sec. 301, P.L. 110-81), and repealed in
    the 112th Congress (sec. 2(d)(2), H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 2011, p. _). A
    gender-based reference was eliminated in the 111th Congress (sec. 2(l),
    H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, p. _).

    Election and membership of standing committees
      The requirements of paragraph (f)(1) were originally contained in
    section 301(c) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (P.L. 93-344,
    July 12, 1974), and 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

    757. Electing committees.

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

    [[Page 499]]

      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 resolutions 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 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;

          (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) A Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner may exceed the
    limitation of subdivision (B) if elected to serve a second consecutive
    Congress as the chair or a second consecutive Congress as the ranking
    minority member.

    [[Page 500]]

    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 the 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 a third term on the
    committee to serve one additional term on the committee as the ranking
    minority member (H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 1989, p. 72). It was again amended
    in the 102d Congress to extend the waiver of the tenure restriction for
    the ranking minority member of the committee (H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 1991,
    p. 39), but in the 103d Congress that provision was stricken as obsolete
    (H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 1993, p. 49). In the 104th Congress the limitation
    on a Member's service on the committee was relaxed to four Congresses
    (from three) in any period of six successive Congresses, with the
    exception that a Member who has served as chair or as ranking minority
    member during a fourth such Congress may serve in either capacity during
    a fifth, so long as not thereby exceeding two consecutive terms as chair
    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 chair and ranking minority member was
    replaced in the 108th Congress with a provision subjecting the chair
    only to the overall tenure limitation that applies to all standing
    committee chairs (sec. 2(e-1), H. Res. 5, Jan. 7, 2003, p. 7). This
    provision was replaced in the 111th Congress with an exception to the
    tenure limitation for the second consecutive Congress in which a chair
    or ranking minority member serves (sec. 2(d), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009,
    p. _). In the 109th Congress subdivisions (A)(ii) and (A)(iii) were
    amended to address a member designated by the elected leadership as
    opposed to a member of the elected leadership of each party, and a
    conforming change was made to subdivision (B) (sec. 2(c), H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 4, 2005, p. 43).
      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 chair who
    had served on the committee for three Congresses and as chair for not
    more than one Congress to be eligible for reelection as chair 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

      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). In the
    99th Congress, the House 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).

    [[Page 501]]

      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 Ethics.

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

      (B) Except as permitted by subdivision (C), a member of the Committee
    on Ethics 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 Ethics may serve on the committee
    during a fourth Congress in a period of five successive Congresses only
    as either the chair or the ranking minority member of the committee.

      (4)(A) At the beginning of a Congress, the Speaker or a designee and
    the Minority Leader or a designee each shall name 10 Members, Delegates,
    or the Resident Commissioner from the respective party of such
    individual who are not members of the Committee on Ethics 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.

    [[Page 502]]

    bers, Delegates, or
    Resident Commissioner from the respective party of such individual to
    serve on that subcommittee.

      (B) Whenever the chair and the ranking minority member of the
    Committee on Ethics 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 Mem

      Before the 93d Congress, the rule that established the size of the
    Committee on Ethics (formerly Standards of Official Conduct) at 12
    members also required that its membership be equally divided between the
    parties. Effective in the 93d Congress, the ratio of the committee was
    codified in the first sentence of subparagraph (3)(A) (formerly clause
    6(a)(2)) (H. Res. 988, Oct. 8, 1974, p. 34470). The Ethics Reform Act of
    1989 added a sentence to limit service on the committee (P.L. 101-194,
    Nov. 30, 1989), which was amended in the 105th and 106th Congresses
    (sec. 2, H. Res. 168, Sept. 18, 1997, p. 19336; H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999,
    p. 47). A requirement that two members from each party rotate off the
    committee was adopted in the 105th Congress (sec. 2, H. Res. 168, Sept.
    18, 1997, p. 19336), but was deleted in the 106th Congress (H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). Subparagraph (4) (formerly clause 6(a)(3)) was
    adopted in the 105th Congress (sec. 1, H. Res. 168, Sept. 18, 1997, p.
    19335). The 106th Congress 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). Gender-based references were
    eliminated in the 111th Congress (sec. 2(l), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, p.
    _). This subparagraph was amended in the 112th Congress to reflect a
    change in committee name (sec. 2(e)(8), H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 2011, p. _).
    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).

    [[Page 503]]

    basis of nomination by that caucus or conference.
    The chair 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
    chair of each affected committee that the election of such Member,
    Delegate, or Resident Commissioner to the committee is automatically
    vacated under this subparagraph.

    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
    elected on the

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

      (B)(i) Ex officio service by a chair 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
    Ethics 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.

    [[Page 504]]

    other subunit of a
    standing committee that is established for a cumulative period longer
    than six months in a Congress.

      (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

      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 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 Ethics (formerly 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 and 112th Congresses to
    conform references to a renamed committee (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p.
    47; H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 2011, p. _). 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. 44). Gender-based references were eliminated in the
    111th Congress (sec. 2(l), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, p. _).

      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 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). Instance where a Member
    submitted his resignation from a committee on grounds of disqualifying
    personal interest (VIII, 3074). The earlier practice was for the
    minority party to handle committee assignments for third-party Members
    (VIII, 2184-2185). In the latter practice, a major party takes that
    responsibility by separate resolution (see, e.g., H. Res. 45, Jan. 24,
    1991, p. 2171).

    [[Page 505]]

    chair. Rank
    shall be determined by the order members are named in resolutions
    electing them to the committee. In the case of a vacancy in the elected
    chair of a committee, the House shall elect another chair.

    Sec. 761. Committee chairs.

      (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 chair thereof. In the
    absence of the member serving as chair, the member next in rank (and so
    on, as often as the case shall happen) shall act as

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

      The requirement that nominations for chairs 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). A provision
    addressing temporary and permanent vacancies in chairs was adopted on
    April 5, 1911 (VIII, 2201), and was continued in the Legislative
    Reorganization Act of 1946 (60 Stat. 812), but the 111th Congress
    deleted such references when clarifying the devolution of authority in
    case of absence or vacancy (sec. 2(m), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, p. _).
    The 104th Congress adopted a limitation on terms for committee and
    subcommittee chairs (sec. 103(b), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 462). The
    109th Congress excepted the Committee on Rules from that limitation
    (sec. 2(c), H. Res. 5, Jan. 4, 2005, p. 43). The 111th Congress repealed
    the limitation (sec. 2(d), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, p. _) and the 112th
    Congress restored it (sec. 2(e)(12), H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 2011, p. _).
    Gender-based references were eliminated in the 111th Congress (sec.
    2(l), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, 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).

    [[Page 506]]

    having resigned as chair of
    a committee, could be reinstated in that role (Mar. 3, 2010, p. _). A
    Member may resign the role of acting chair (Mar. 4, 2010, p. _), in
    which case the member third in rank assumes the role of acting chair
    (Mar. 4, 2010, p. _).

      In the 102d Congress a resolution included as a matter properly
    incidental to its election of the chair of a standing committee a
    proviso that his powers and duties be exercised by the vice chair 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
    chair to exercise the powers and duties of a chair of a standing
    committee until otherwise ordered by the House (H. Res. 396, Mar. 23,
    1994, p. 6093). Upon the resignation of a chair, the acting chair
    assumes that role without further action of the House (Mar. 3, 2010, p.
    _). The Chair has refused to respond to a parliamentary inquiry seeking
    hypothetical guidance on how a Member,

    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.

      This paragraph was adopted in the 104th Congress (sec. 101(b), H. Res.
    6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 462), replacing a requirement that all standing
    committees having more than 20 members (except the Committee on the
    Budget) establish at least four subcommittees (H. Res. 5, Jan. 14, 1975,
    p. 20). In the 106th Congress the paragraph was amended to delete the
    Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure from the list of
    exceptions to the general rule and to add a new exception for committees
    that maintain a subcommittee on oversight (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p.
    47). In the 110th Congress it was amended to reflect a change in the
    name of a committee (sec. 215(e), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 2007, p. 19).
    Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this
    provision was found in former clause 6(d) of rule X (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6,
    1999, p. 47).

    [[Page 507]]

    to have not more
    than six during the 108th and 109th Congresses and not more than seven
    during the 110th through 112th Congresses (sec. 3(b), H. Res. 5, Jan. 7,
    2003, p. 11; sec. 3(b), H. Res. 5, Jan. 4, 2005, p. 44; sec. 511(b), H.
    Res. 6, Jan. 4, 2007, p. 19 (adopted Jan. 5, 2007); sec. 3(a)(1), H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, p. _; sec. 3(k), H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 2011, p. _).
    In the 108th Congress the Committee on Appropriations reorganized its
    subcommittees to reflect the creation of the new Department on Homeland
    Security (P.L 107-296) by creating a new subcommittee on Homeland
    Security and combining the subcommittees on Transportation and Treasury,
    Postal Service and General Government. 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.

      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 through 112th
    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. 44;
    sec. 511(b), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 2007, p. 19 (adopted Jan. 5, 2007); sec.
    3(b), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, p. _; sec. 3(k), H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 2011,
    p. _); the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure was permitted
    to have not more than six during the 107th through 112th 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. 44; sec. 511(b),
    H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 2007, p. 19 (adopted Jan. 5, 2007); sec. 3(b), H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, p. _; sec. 3(k), H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 2011, p. _);
    and the Committee on Armed Services was permitted

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

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

    [[Page 508]]

    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 the party caucus as ``temporary'' (in order
    to avoid caucus limitations on committee assignments) (Feb. 5, 1991, p.
    2814).

    Expense resolutions
      Form of resolution electing a Member to a committee and fixing 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

    763. Primary expense resolution.

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

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

    [[Page 509]]

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

    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.

    [[Page 510]]

      (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

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

    [[Page 511]]

    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).
      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

      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. 1108). 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(k)(1) of rule X'') was held not to be subject to a
    point of order under clause 5(a) of rule XI (now clause 6(a) of this
    rule) for lack of report language detailing the funding provided,
    because the resolution was called up at the beginning of the session
    before consideration of a primary expense resolution for all committees
    for that calendar year (Feb. 5, 1992, p. 1621).

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

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

    [[Page 512]]

    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). A gender-based
    reference was eliminated in the 111th Congress (sec. 2(l), H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 6, 2009, p. _).

      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 chair 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
    adopted in the 92d Congress, the paragraph required that the minority be
    accorded fair consideration in the appointment of committee staff (H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 22, 1971, p. 144).

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

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

    768. Interim funding.

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

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

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

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

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

    [[Page 513]]

          (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 chair of the committee, except as
    provided in paragraph (e), and approved by the Committee on House
    Administration.

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

    [[Page 514]]

    ported by the Committee on House
    Administration and adopted by the House after the adoption of these
    rules.

      (3) This clause shall be effective only insofar as it is not
    inconsistent with a resolution re

      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). Clerical corrections
    were effected in the 107th Congress (sec. 2(x), H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 2001,
    p. 24). Paragraph (e) was simplified and a gender-based reference was
    eliminated in the 111th Congress (secs. 2(l), 2(m), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6,
    2009, p. _). Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th
    Congress, this provision was found in former clause 5(f) of rule XI (H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

    Travel
      At its organization the 104th Congress suspended the operation of
    paragraph (f) in favor of special provisions for interim funding in
    light of its abolishment of three standing committees, its reduction in
    the overall number of committee staff, and its institution of biennial
    primary expense resolutions (sec. 101(c)(3), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p.
    462). The House by unanimous consent has agreed to a resolution
    providing funding for interim expenses of a new select committee (Feb.
    13, 2003, p. 3793) and a new standing committee (Jan. 4, 2005, p. 71).

    [[Page 515]]

    ees in a country where local currencies are available for
    this purpose.

    769. Committee travel.

      8. (a)  Local currencies owned by the
    United States shall be made available to the committee and its employees
    engaged in carrying out their official duties outside the United States
    or its territories or possessions. Appropriated funds, including those
    authorized under this clause and clause 6, may not be expended for the
    purpose of defraying expenses of members of a committee or its
    employ

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

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

          (2) A member or employee shall be reimbursed for the expenses of
    such individual 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) incurred during that day.

    [[Page 516]]

    Sec. 770. Travel reports.

          (3)  Each member or employee of
    a committee shall make to the chair 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 chair 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 the expenses of such
    individual 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) incurred during that day.

      (3) A member or employee of a committee may not receive reimbursement
    for the cost of any transportation in connection with travel outside the
    United States unless the member or employee actually paid for the
    transportation.

      (d) The restrictions respecting travel outside the United States set
    forth in paragraph (c) also shall apply to travel outside the United
    States by a Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or
    employee of the House authorized under any standing rule.

    [[Page 517]]

    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). Clerical corrections were effected and
    gender-based references were eliminated in the 111th Congress (secs.
    2(l), 2(m), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, p. _).
      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

    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 chair thereof,
    and by other Members or employees when authorized by the Speaker.
    Consolidated committee reports prepared on a quarterly basis, and
    individual reports required within 30 days after the travel involved,
    must be forwarded to the Clerk of the House and published in the
    Congressional Record.

    771. Thirty professional staff.

      9.  (a)(1) Subject to
    subparagraph (2) and paragraph (f), each standing committee may appoint,
    by majority vote, not more than 30 professional staff members to be
    compensated from the funds provided for the appointment of committee
    staff by primary and additional expense resolutions. Each professional
    staff <> member appointed under this
    subparagraph shall be assigned to the chair and the ranking minority
    member of the committee, as the committee considers advisable.

    [[Page 518]]

    lect Committee on
    Intelligence) so request, not more than 10 persons (or one-third of the
    total professional committee staff appointed under this clause,
    whichever is fewer) may be selected, by majority vote of the minority
    party members, for appointment by the committee as professional staff
    members under subparagraph (1). The committee shall appoint persons so
    selected whose character and qualifications are acceptable to a majority
    of the committee. If the committee determines that the character and
    qualifications of a person so selected are unacceptable, a majority of
    the minority party members may select another person for appointment by
    the committee to the professional staff until such appointment is made.
    Each professional staff member appointed under this subparagraph shall
    be assigned to such committee business as the minority party members of
    the committee consider advisable.

    Sec. 773. Minority.

      (2)  Subject to paragraph (f) whenever a
    majority of the minority party members of a standing committee (other
    than the Committee on Ethics or the Permanent Se

    [[Page 519]]

    Jan. 14, 1975, p. 20).
    The requirement added in 1975 that staff positions made available to
    subcommittee chairs 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
    Ethics (formerly Standards of Official Conduct) (H. Res. 58, Mar. 1,
    1983, p. 3241). The 101st Congress added an exemption for the Committee
    on Rules (H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 1989, p. 72). The Ethics Reform Act of 1989
    struck the antidiscrimination provisions as redundant (P.L. 101-194,
    Nov. 30, 1989). The 104th Congress eliminated the former distinction
    between professional and clerical staff, set the authorized maximum for
    committee staff under expense resolutions at 30, eliminated subcommittee
    entitlement to staff, and set the entitlement of the full committee
    minority within that number at one-third (sec. 101(c)(5), H. Res. 6,
    Jan. 4, 1995, p. 462). The 104th Congress also mandated that the total
    number of staff of House committees be at least one-third less than the
    corresponding total in the 103d Congress (sec. 101(a), H. Res. 6, Jan.
    4, 1995, p. 462). A gender-based reference was eliminated in the 111th
    Congress (sec. 2(l), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, p. _). Subparagraph (2)
    was amended in the 112th Congress to reflect a change in committee name
    (sec. 2(e)(8), H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 2011, p. _). Before the House
    recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this provision was found in
    former clause 6 of rule XI (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).
      This clause (formerly clause 6 of rule XI) had its origins in section
    202 of the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946 (60 Stat. 812), which
    allocated up to four nonpartisan professionals to each committee other
    than Appropriations and specifically provided for clerical staff, and
    which was incorporated into the rules on January 3, 1953 (p. 24).
    Section 302(b) of the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1970 (84 Stat.
    1140), which increased the authorized maximum for professional staff
    from four to six and added the concept of minority staffing, was
    incorporated into the rules in the 92d Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 22,
    1971, p. 144). In the 93d Congress the maximum was increased from six to
    18, the minority entitlement within that number was increased from two
    to six, a requirement that professional staff be appointed without
    regard to political affiliation was eliminated, and prohibitions against
    consideration of race, creed, sex, or age in the appointment of staff
    were added (H. Res. 988, Oct. 8, 1974, p. 34470). An exemption for the
    Committee on the Budget was included in section 901 of the Congressional
    Budget Act of 1974 (88 Stat. 330), was later omitted under the Committee
    Reform Amendments of 1974 (H. Res. 988, Oct. 8, 1974, p. 34470), and was
    reinserted by the 94th Congress (H. Res. 5,

      Additional staff of committees are authorized by the Committee on
    House Administration and agreed to by the House. There is no legal power
    to fill a vacancy in the clerkship of a committee after one Congress has
    expired and before the next House has been organized (IV, 4539). An
    assault upon the clerk of a committee within the walls of the Capitol
    was held to be a breach of privilege (II, 1629). The pay of clerks has
    been the subject of several decisions (IV, 4536-4538).

    Sec. 774. Consultants and training.

      Committees  may, with the
    approval of the Committee on House Administration, procure the temporary
    or intermittent services of consultants and obtain specialized training
    for professional staff, subject to expense resolutions, under the
    Legislative Reorganization Act of 1970, sections 303 and 304 (2 U.S.C.
    72a(i) and (j)).

    Sec. 775. Staff duties.

      (b)(1)  The professional staff
    members of each standing committee--

    [[Page 520]]

          (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 chair certifies that the compensation paid
    by the committee for any such staff is commensurate with the work
    performed for the committee in accordance with clause 8 of rule XXIII.

      (B) The use of any ``associate'' or ``shared'' staff by a committee
    other than the Committee on Appropriations shall be subject to the
    review of, and to any terms, conditions, or limitations established by,
    the Committee on House Administration in connection with the reporting
    of any primary or additional expense resolution.

      The Ethics Reform Act of 1989 prescribed that staff work be confined
    to committee business during congressional working hours but maintained
    exceptions for the Committees on the Budget and Rules (P.L. 101-194,
    Nov. 30, 1989). The 104th Congress eliminated exceptions by committee in
    favor of exceptions for ``associate'' or ``shared'' staff (sec.
    101(c)(5), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 462). Technical corrections were
    effected in the 104th Congress (H. Res. 254, Nov. 30, 1995, p. 35077);
    in the 106th Congress, which conformed references to a renamed committee
    (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47); in the 107th Congress, which conformed
    references to a redesignated rule (sec. 2(s), H. Res. 5, Jan. 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). A gender-
    based reference was eliminated in the 111th Congress (sec. 2(l), H. Res.
    5, Jan. 6, 2009, p. _). Before the House recodified its rules in the
    106th Congress, this provision was found in former clause 6 of rule XI
    (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

    [[Page 521]]

    single gross per annum rate, to be fixed by the chair and that
    does not exceed the maximum rate of pay as in effect from time to time
    under applicable provisions of law.

    Sec. 777. Pay.

      (c)  Each employee on the professional or
    investigative staff of a standing committee shall be entitled to pay at
    a

      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). A gender-based
    reference was eliminated in the 111th Congress (sec. 2(l), H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 6, 2009, p. _). Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th
    Congress, this provision was found in former clause 6 of rule XI (H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

    Sec. 778. Staff, Committee on Appropriations.

      (d)  Subject to
    appropriations hereby authorized, the Committee on Appropriations may
    appoint by majority vote such staff as it determines to be necessary (in
    addition to the clerk of the committee and assistants for the minority).
    The staff appointed under this paragraph, other than minority
    assistants, shall possess such qualifications as the committee may
    prescribe.

    [[Page 522]]

    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).

      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.

    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 523]]

    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 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(k)(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

      (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.

      (h) Paragraph (a) may not be construed to authorize the appointment of
    additional professional staff members of a committee pursuant to a
    request under paragraph (a) by the minority party members of that
    committee if 10 or more professional staff members provided for in
    paragraph (a)(1) who are satisfactory to a majority of the minority
    party members are otherwise assigned to assist the minority party
    members.

    [[Page 524]]

    to paragraph (f) were effected in the 109th and
    112th Congresses (sec. 2(a), H. Res. 5, Jan. 4, 2005, p. 42; sec.
    2(e)(8), H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 2011, p. _).

      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
    conforming changes

    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.

      Section 202(a) of the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946 (60 Stat.
    812), which was incorporated into the rules on January 3, 1953 (p. 24),
    required committee professional staffs to be appointed on a permanent
    basis without regard to political affiliation. The concept of minority
    staffing was added by section 302(b) of the Legislative Reorganization
    Act of 1970. Under the Committee Reform Amendments of 1974, effective
    January 3, 1975 (H. Res. 988, 93d Cong., Oct. 8, 1974, p. 34470),
    paragraph (i) (formerly clause 6(i) of rule XI) was added to permit
    committees to employ nonpartisan staff upon an affirmative vote of the
    majority of the members of each party. In the 104th Congress it was
    amended to reflect the elimination of the former distinction between
    ``professional'' and ``clerical'' staff (sec. 101(c)(5), H. Res. 6, Jan.
    4, 1995, p. 462). Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th
    Congress, this provision was found in former clause 6(i) of rule XI (H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

    Select and joint committees

    Sec. 781. Former 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 on the names, professions, and salaries of
    committee employees.

    [[Page 525]]

    gate, 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 assigned. The chair 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 chair of each affected select or joint
    committee that the appointment of such Member, Delegate, or Resident
    Commissioner to the select or joint committee is automatically vacated
    under this paragraph.

    782. Party membership as basis for
    appointment.

      10. (a)  Membership on a select or joint committee appointed by
    the Speaker under clause 11 of rule I during the course of a Congress
    shall be contingent on continuing membership in the party caucus or
    conference of which the Member, Dele

      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). Gender-based references were eliminated in
    the 111th Congress (sec. 2(l), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, p. _). Before
    the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this provision was
    found in former clause 6(g) of rule X (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

    Sec. 783. Select and joint committee compliance.

      (b)  Each
    select or joint committee, other than a conference committee, shall
    comply with clause 2(a) of rule XI unless specifically exempted by law.

      Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, paragraph
    (b) was found in clause 2(a) of rule XI (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p.
    47). The extension of clause 2(a) requirements to select and joint
    committees was added to clause 2(a) when that rule was rewritten by the
    Committee Reform Amendments of 1974 (H. Res. 988, 93d Cong., Oct. 8,
    1974, p. 34470).

    [[Page 526]]

    lect committee on aging. That provision was stricken in the 103d
    Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 1993, p. 49).

    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
    se

    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 20 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

          (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.

    [[Page 527]]

      (3) The Speaker and Minority Leader each may designate a respective
    leadership staff member to assist in the capacity of the Speaker or
    Minority Leader 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 chair or the ranking minority member of the
    select committee, tenure on the select committee shall not be limited.

      (b)(1) There shall be referred to the select committee proposed
    legislation, messages, petitions, memorials, and other matters relating
    to the following:

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

          (B) Intelligence and intelligence-related activities of all other
    departments and agencies of the Government, including the tactical
    intelligence and intelligence-related activities of the Department of
    Defense.

          (C) The organization or reorganization of a department or agency
    of the Government to the extent that the organization or reorganization
    relates to a function or activity involving intelligence or
    intelligence-related activities.

    [[Page 528]]

          (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).

      (2) Proposed legislation initially reported by the select committee
    (other than provisions solely involving matters specified in
    subparagraph (1)(A) or subparagraph (1)(D)(i)) containing any matter
    otherwise within the jurisdiction of a standing committee shall be
    referred by the Speaker to that standing committee. Proposed legislation
    initially reported by another committee that contains matter within the
    jurisdiction of the select committee shall be referred by the Speaker to
    the select committee if requested by the chair of the select committee.

    [[Page 529]]

      (3) Nothing in this clause shall be construed as prohibiting or
    otherwise restricting the authority of any other committee to study and
    review an intelligence or intelligence-related activity to the extent
    that such activity directly affects a matter otherwise within the
    jurisdiction of that committee.

      (4) Nothing in this clause shall be construed as amending, limiting,
    or otherwise changing the authority of a standing committee to obtain
    full and prompt access to the product of the intelligence and
    intelligence-related activities of a department or agency of the
    Government relevant to a matter otherwise within the jurisdiction of
    that committee.

      (c)(1) For purposes of accountability to the House, the select
    committee shall make regular and periodic reports to the House on the
    nature and extent of the intelligence and intelligence-related
    activities of the various departments and agencies of the United States.
    The select committee shall promptly call to the attention of the House,
    or to any other appropriate committee, a matter requiring the attention
    of the House or another committee. In making such report, the select
    committee shall proceed in a manner consistent with paragraph (g) to
    protect national security.

    [[Page 530]]

    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.
      (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

      (3) Within six weeks after the President submits a budget under
    section 1105(a) of title 31, United States Code, or at such time as the
    Committee on the Budget may request, the select committee shall submit
    to the Committee on the Budget the views and estimates described in
    section 301(d) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 regarding matters
    within the jurisdiction of the select committee.

      (d)(1) Except as specified in subparagraph (2), clauses 8(a), (b), and
    (c) and 9(a), (b), and (c) of this rule, and clauses 1, 2, and 4 of rule
    XI shall apply to the select committee to the extent not inconsistent
    with this clause.

    [[Page 531]]

      (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 Ethics and of
    the select committee concerning the security of classified information
    during and after the period of the employment or contractual agreement
    of such employee or person with the select committee; and

          (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 such employee or person will be given
    access by the select committee.

    [[Page 532]]

    sure of classified information clearly
    outweighs any infringement on the privacy of a person.
      (f) The select committee shall formulate and carry out such rules and
    procedures as it considers necessary to prevent the disclosure, without
    the consent of each person concerned, of information in the possession
    of the select committee that unduly infringes on the privacy or that
    violates the constitutional rights of such person. Nothing herein shall
    be construed to prevent the select committee from publicly disclosing
    classified information in a case in which it determines that national
    interest in the disclo

      (g)(1) The select committee may disclose publicly any information in
    its possession after a determination by the select committee that the
    public interest would be served by such disclosure. With respect to the
    disclosure of information for which this paragraph requires action by
    the select committee--

          (A) the select committee shall meet to vote on the matter within
    five days after a member of the select committee requests a vote; and

          (B) a member of the select committee may not make such a
    disclosure before a vote by the select committee on the matter, or after
    a vote by the select committee on the matter except in accordance with
    this paragraph.

      (2)(A) In a case in which the select committee votes to disclose
    publicly any information that has been classified under established
    security procedures, that has been submitted to it by the executive
    branch, and that the executive branch requests be kept secret, the
    select committee shall notify the President of such vote.

    [[Page 533]]

    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.
      (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 the President objects to the
    disclosure of such information, provides reasons therefor, and certifies
    that the

      (C) If the President, personally in writing, notifies the select
    committee of objections to the disclosure of information as provided in
    subdivision (B), the select committee may, by majority vote, refer the
    question of the disclosure of such information, with a recommendation
    thereon, to the House. The select committee may not publicly disclose
    such information without leave of the House.

      (D) Whenever the select committee votes to refer the question of
    disclosure of any information to the House under subdivision (C), the
    chair 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 chair of the select committee does not offer in the House a
    motion to consider in closed session a matter reported under subdivision
    (D) within four calendar days on which the House is in session after the
    recommendation described in subdivision (C) is reported, then such a
    motion shall be privileged when offered by a Member, Delegate, or
    Resident Commissioner. In either case such a motion shall be decided
    without debate or intervening motion except one that the House adjourn.

    [[Page 534]]

    division (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?''.
      (F) Upon adoption by the House of a motion to resolve into closed
    session as described in sub

      (G) Debate on the question described in subdivision (F) shall be
    limited to two hours equally divided and controlled by the chair and
    ranking minority member of the select committee. After such debate the
    previous question shall be considered as ordered on the question of
    approving the recommendation without intervening motion except one
    motion that the House adjourn. The House shall vote on the question in
    open session but without divulging the information with respect to which
    the vote is taken. If the recommendation of the select committee is not
    approved, then the question is considered as recommitted to the select
    committee for further recommendation.

      (3)(A) Information in the possession of the select committee relating
    to the lawful intelligence or intelligence-related activities of a
    department or agency of the United States that has been classified under
    established security procedures, and that the select committee has
    determined should not be disclosed under subparagraph (1) or (2), may
    not be made available to any person by a Member, Delegate, Resident
    Commissioner, officer, or employee of the House except as provided in
    subdivision (B).

    [[Page 535]]

    tion 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.
      (B) The select committee shall, under such regulations as it may
    prescribe, make informa

      (4) The Committee on Ethics shall investigate any unauthorized
    disclosure of intelligence or intelligence-related information by a
    Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee of the
    House in violation of subparagraph (3) and report to the House
    concerning any allegation that it finds to be substantiated.

    [[Page 536]]

    findings to the House and recommend
    appropriate action. Recommendations may include censure, removal from
    committee membership, or expulsion from the House, in the case of a
    Member, or removal from office or employment or punishment for contempt,
    in the case of an officer or employee.
      (5) Upon the request of a person who is subject to an investigation
    described in subparagraph (4), the Committee on Ethics 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 Ethics 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

      (h) The select committee may permit a personal representative of the
    President, designated by the President to serve as a liaison to the
    select committee, to attend any closed meeting of the select committee.

      (i) Subject to the Rules of the House, funds may not be appropriated
    for a fiscal year, with the exception of a bill or joint resolution
    continuing appropriations, or an amendment thereto, or a conference
    report thereon, to, or for use of, a department or agency of the United
    States to carry out any of the following activities, unless the funds
    shall previously have been authorized by a bill or joint resolution
    passed by the House during the same or preceding fiscal year to carry
    out such activity for such fiscal year:

          (1) The activities of the 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.

    [[Page 537]]

          (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--

          (A) the collection, analysis, production, dissemination, or use of
    information that relates to a foreign country, or a government,
    political group, party, military force, movement, or other association
    in a foreign country, and that relates to the defense, foreign policy,
    national security, or related policies of the United States and other
    activity in support of the collection, analysis, production,
    dissemination, or use of such information;

          (B) activities taken to counter similar activities directed
    against the United States;

          (C) covert or clandestine activities affecting the relations of
    the United States with a foreign government, political group, party,
    military force, movement, or other association;

    [[Page 538]]

    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
          (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

          (E) covert or clandestine activities directed against persons
    described in subdivision (D).

      (2) In this clause the term ``department or agency'' includes any
    organization, committee, council, establishment, or office within the
    Federal Government.

      (3) For purposes of this clause, reference to a department, agency,
    bureau, or subdivision shall include a reference to any successor
    department, agency, bureau, or subdivision to the extent that a
    successor engages in intelligence or intelligence-related activities now
    conducted by the department, agency, bureau, or subdivision referred to
    in this clause.

      (k) Clause 12(a) of rule XXII does not apply to meetings of a
    conference committee respecting legislation (or any part thereof)
    reported by the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.

    [[Page 539]]

    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 chair or ranking minority member; to make the
    Speaker (rather than the Majority Leader) an ex officio member of the
    panel (as opposed to 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 chair 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. 826); (13) to conform references to a renamed
    committee (sec. 213(c), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 2007, p. 19); (14) to conform
    jurisdictional statements to changes in the intelligence community (sec.
    504, H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 2007, p. 19 (adopted Jan. 5, 2007)); (15) to
    eliminate gender-based references (sec. 2(l), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009,
    p. _); (16) to increase the size of the committee to not more than 22
    members, of whom not more than 13 shall be of the same political party
    (H. Res. 97, 111th Cong., Jan. 28, 2009, p. _); (17) to conform
    references to a renamed committee and to reduce the size of the
    committee to not more than 20 members, of whom not more than 12 shall be
    of the same political party (secs. 2(e)(8), 2(e)(11), H. Res. 5, Jan. 5,
    2011, p. _). Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th
    Congress, this provision was found in former rule XLVIII (H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). By order of the House, the size of the committee
    was increased for the 107th Congress to not more than 20 members, of
    whom not more than 11 shall be of the same political party (Jan. 6,
    2001, p. 25). The Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of
    2004 (P.L. 108-458) reorganized the intelligence community.

    Sec. 786. 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 committee from 13 to 14
    members (H. Res. 70, 96th Cong., Jan. 25, 1979, p. 1023); (2) to conform
    references to a renamed 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

    [[Page 540]]

    the requisite number under the 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 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).
      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 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 committee to vote to go
    into executive session if a majority of the members present, there being
    in attendance

      The resolution creating the 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 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 committee has shared 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 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).

      Paragraph (g)(2) places restrictions on the committee only with
    respect to the public disclosure of classified information in the
    possession of that committee, and does not prevent the House from
    determining to release any matter properly presented to it in secret
    session pursuant to clause 9 of rule XVII (formerly rule XXIX) (Feb. 25,
    1980, p. 3618).

     end segment .007 segment .008 -- rule XI

    [[Page 541]]

      In the 107th Congress the 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 542]]

    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 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 if 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.
    43). For the requirement in Jefferson's

      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.

      (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.

    [[Page 543]]

    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.

      (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,

      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(k)(1) of rule X.

      Paragraph (c) was made part of the rules by the Committee Reform
    Amendments of 1974, effective January 3, 1975 (H. Res. 988, 93d Cong.,
    Oct. 8, 1974, p. 34470). In the 105th and 106th Congresses, it was
    amended to update a reference to the ``contingent fund'' (H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 7, 1997, p. 121; H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47), and conforming
    changes were effected in the 109th and 112th Congresses (sec. 2(a), H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 4, 2005, p. 42; sec. 2(e)(8), H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 2011, p.
    _). Clerical and stylistic changes were effected when the House
    recodified its rules in the 106th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p.
    47).

    Sec. 790. Activity reports.

      (d)(1)  Not later than the 30th
    day after June 1 and December 1, a committee shall submit to the House a
    semiannual report on the activities of that committee.

    [[Page 544]]

      (2) Such report shall include--

          (A) separate sections summarizing the legislative and oversight
    activities of that committee under this rule and rule X during the
    applicable period;

          (B) in the case of the first such report, a summary of the
    oversight plans submitted by the committee under clause 2(d) of rule X;

          (C) a summary of the actions taken and recommendations made with
    respect to the oversight plans specified in subdivision (B);

          (D) a summary of any additional oversight activities undertaken by
    that committee and any recommendations made or actions taken thereon;
    and

          (E) a delineation of any hearings held pursuant to clauses 2(n),
    (o), or (p) of this rule.

      (3) After an adjournment sine die of a regular session of a Congress,
    or after December 15, whichever occurs first, the chair of a committee
    may file the second or fourth semiannual report described in
    subparagraph (1) with the Clerk at any time and without approval of the
    committee, provided that--

          (A) a copy of the report has been available to each member of the
    committee for at least seven calendar days; and

          (B) the report includes any supplemental, minority, or additional
    views submitted by a member of the committee.

    [[Page 545]]

    the Committees on Appropriations,
    the Budget, House Administration, Rules, and Ethics (formerly 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). In the 111th Congress, the
    House amended subparagraph (3) to require the inclusion of hearings
    under paragraphs (n), (o), and (p) of this clause in the oversight
    section of activities reports (H. Res. 40, Jan. 14, 2009, p. _), and
    eliminated a gender-based reference (sec. 2(l), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009,
    p. _). In the 112th Congress, the paragraph was rewritten entirely to
    increase to semiannual the frequency of reports and to clarify late-
    session filing (sec. 2(e)(13), H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 2011, p. _).
      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

    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 546]]

          (C) shall in any event incorporate all of the succeeding
    provisions of this clause to the extent applicable.

      (2) Each committee shall make its rules publicly available in
    electronic form and submit such rules for publication in the
    Congressional Record not later than 30 days after the chair of the
    committee is elected in each odd-numbered year.

      (3) A committee may adopt a rule providing that the chair be directed
    to offer a motion under clause 1 of rule XXII whenever the chair
    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 in which 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 (2) was amended in the 112th Congress to require committee
    rules to also be publicly available in electronic form, and to begin the
    day-count for submission from the election of the chair (vice the
    committee) (sec. 2(c)(8), H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 2011, p. _). Subparagraph
    (3) was added in the 109th Congress (sec. 2(d), H. Res. 5, Jan. 4, 2005,
    p. 43). Gender-based references were eliminated in the 111th Congress
    (sec. 2(l), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, p. _).

    [[Page 547]]

    bert, 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).
      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 Al

    Sec. 792. Committee procedure generally.

      Failure  to follow
    certain procedural requirements imposed on committees by this rule may
    invalidate committee actions. Violation of the requirements as to open
    meetings and hearings and other hearing irregularities improperly
    overruled (see clause 2(g)(5) of rule XI) or the prescribed committee
    procedures for reporting bills and resolutions (clause 2(h) of rule XI)
    may in some instances be the basis for a point of order in the House,
    resulting in the recommitment of the bill. However, a point of order
    does not ordinarily lie in the House against consideration of a bill by
    reason of defective committee procedures occurring before the time the
    bill is ordered reported to the House (Procedure, ch. 17, Sec. 11.1).

      Many of the procedures applicable to committees derive from
    Jefferson's Manual, which governs the House and its committees in all
    cases to which it is applicable (clause 1 of rule XXIX). 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 because 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 motion for the previous question
    may be applied to a question under debate in committee when it has been
    read (or considered as read) for amendment in its entirety.

      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

    [[Page 548]]

    unless otherwise provided by
    written rule adopted by the committee.
    Additional and special meetings

    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

      (c)(1) The chair of each standing committee may call and convene, as
    the chair considers necessary, additional and special meetings of the
    committee for the consideration of a bill or resolution pending before
    the committee or for the conduct of other committee business, subject to
    such rules as the committee may adopt. The committee shall meet for such
    purpose under that call of the chair.

    [[Page 549]]

    tify all members of the committee that
    such special meeting will be held and inform them of its date and hour
    and the measure or matter to be considered. Only the measure or matter
    specified in that notice may be considered at that special meeting.
    Temporary absence of chair
      (2) Three or more members of a standing committee may file in the
    offices of the committee a written request that the chair 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 chair of the filing of the
    request. If the chair 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 no

      (d) A member of the majority party on each standing committee or
    subcommittee thereof shall be designated by the chair of the full
    committee as the vice chair of the committee or subcommittee, as the
    case may be, and shall preside during the absence of the chair from any
    meeting. If the chair and vice chair 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
    chair (H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 1991, p. 39). In the 104th Congress paragraph
    (d) was amended to permit the chair of a full committee to designate
    vice chairs 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). Gender-based references were eliminated in the
    111th Congress (sec. 2(l), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, p. _).

    [[Page 550]]

    Committee records
      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 chair (VIII, 2213, 2214). These
    precedents should be read in light of paragraph (d) and clause 5(c) of
    rule X. 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 chair, call a meeting of the committee on the same day (VIII,
    2213).

    794. Required records.

      (e)(1)(A)  Each committee shall keep
    a complete record of all committee action which shall include--

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

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

    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 and also made publicly
    available in electronic form within 48 hours of such record vote.
    Information so available 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.

    [[Page 551]]

      (ii) The result of any record vote taken in executive session in the
    Committee on Ethics may not be made available for inspection by the
    public without an affirmative vote of a majority of the members of the
    committee.

    Sec. 796. Committee files.

      (2)(A)  Except as provided in
    subdivision (B), all committee hearings, records, data, charts, and
    files shall be kept separate and distinct from the congressional office
    records of the member serving as its chair. 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 Ethics, 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.

      (5) To the maximum extent practicable, each committee shall--

    [[Page 552]]

    ness in a manner that allows the public
    to easily listen to and view the proceedings; and
          (A) provide audio and video coverage of each hearing or meeting
    for the transaction of busi

          (B) maintain the recordings of such coverage in a manner that is
    easily accessible to the public.

      (6) Not later than 24 hours after the adoption of any amendment to a
    measure or matter considered by a committee, the chair of such committee
    shall cause the text of each such amendment to be made publicly
    available in electronic form.

    [[Page 553]]

    7, 1997, p. 121). Subparagraphs (5) and
    (6) were added in the 112th Congress (secs. 2(c)(6), 2(c)(9), H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 5, 2011, 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). A gender-based reference was eliminated in the 111th
    Congress (sec. 2(l), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, p. _). This paragraph was
    amended in the 112th Congress to reflect a change in committee name
    (sec. 2(e)(8), H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 2011, p. _).
      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 Ethics (formerly 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 because proxies
    were prohibited as of that date, but in the 94th Congress clause 2(f) of
    rule XI was amended to permit proxies in committee, and this paragraph
    was likewise amended to reinsert the requirement of availability for
    public inspection (H. Res. 5, Jan. 14, 1975, p. 20). When proxy voting
    was again eliminated in the 104th Congress, the reference thereto in the
    third sentence of paragraph (e)(1) was deleted (sec. 104(b), H. Res. 6,
    Jan. 4, 1995, p. 463). Paragraph (e)(1) was amended in the 112th
    Congress to require that record votes be electronically available within
    48 hours (sec. 2(c)(5), H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 2011, p. _). 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 Ethics (formerly 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.

      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).

      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 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 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).

    [[Page 554]]

    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.

    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 555]]

    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
    Ethics or its subcommittees) shall be open to the public, including to
    radio, television, and still photography coverage, except when the
    committee or subcommittee, in open session and with a majority present,
    determines by record vote that all or part of the remainder of the
    meeting on that day shall be in executive session because disclosure of
    matters to be considered would endanger national security, would
    compromise sensitive law enforcement information,

      (2)(A) Each hearing conducted by a committee or subcommittee (other
    than the Committee on Ethics 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--

    [[Page 556]]

    evidence to be received would endanger
    national security, would compromise sensitive law enforcement
    information, or would violate clause 2(k)(5); or
          (i) agree to close the hearing for the sole purpose of discussing
    whether testimony 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 Ethics 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.

      (D) The committee or subcommittee may vote by the same procedure
    described in this subparagraph to close one subsequent day of hearing,
    except that the Committee on Appropriations, the Committee on Armed
    Services, and the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, and the
    subcommittees thereof, may vote by the same procedure to close up to
    five additional, consecutive days of hearings.

      (3)(A) The chair of a committee shall announce the date, place, and
    subject matter of--

    [[Page 557]]

          (i) a committee hearing, which may not commence earlier than one
    week after such notice; or

          (ii) a committee meeting, which may not commence earlier than the
    third day on which members have notice thereof.

      (B) A hearing or meeting may begin sooner than specified in
    subdivision (A) in either of the following circumstances (in which case
    the chair shall make the announcement specified in subdivision (A) at
    the earliest possible time):

          (i) the chair of the committee, with the concurrence of the
    ranking minority member, determines that there is good cause; or

          (ii) 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.

      (C) An announcement made under this subparagraph shall be published
    promptly in the Daily Digest and made publicly available in electronic
    form.

      (D) This subparagraph and subparagraph (4) shall not apply to the
    Committee on Rules.

      (4) At least 24 hours prior to the commencement of a meeting for the
    markup of legislation, or at the time of an announcement under
    subparagraph (3)(B) made within 24 hours before such meeting, the chair
    of the committee shall cause the text of such legislation to be made
    publicly available in electronic form.

    [[Page 558]]

    summaries thereof. In the case of a witness
    appearing in a nongovernmental capacity, a written statement of proposed
    testimony shall include a curriculum vitae and a disclosure of the
    amount and source (by agency and program) of each Federal grant (or
    subgrant thereof) or contract (or subcontract thereof) received during
    the current fiscal year or either of the two previous fiscal years by
    the witness or by an entity represented by the witness. Such statements,
    with appropriate redactions to protect the privacy of the witness, shall
    be made publicly available in electronic form not later than one day
    after the witness appears.
      (5) 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

      (6)(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.

      (7) This paragraph does not apply to hearings of the Committee on
    Appropriations under clause 4(a)(1) of rule X.

    [[Page 559]]

    committee votes to close a meeting or hearing and
    to provide that a noncommittee Member cannot be excluded from a hearing
    except by a vote of the House. However, subparagraph (2) was amended in
    the 96th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 15, 1979, p. 8) to permit a majority
    of those present under the rules of the committee for the purpose of
    taking testimony (not less than two members as provided in clause
    2(h)(2) of rule XI) to vote to close a hearing either to discuss whether
    the testimony would endanger national security or would violate clause
    2(k)(5) of this rule, or to proceed to close the hearing as provided by
    clause 2(k)(5). In the 98th Congress subparagraph (2) was amended
    further to permit the Committees on Appropriations and Armed Services,
    and the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, and their
    subcommittees, when voting in open session with a quorum present, to
    close a hearing on that particular day and for up to five additional
    days, for a total of not to exceed six days (H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 1983, p.
    34). In the 104th Congress the paragraph was amended to require that
    meetings and hearings open to the public also be open to broadcast and
    photographic media; subparagraph (2) was further amended to permit
    closed meetings only on specified conditions and to delete an exception
    for meetings relating to internal budget or personnel matters and to
    specify a new condition (sensitive law enforcement information) for
    closing hearings (sec. 105, H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 463). The
    paragraph was also amended to conform references to renamed committees
    (sec. 202(b), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 467; H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999,
    p. 47). In the 105th Congress subparagraphs (1) and (2) were again
    amended to reflect an amendment to former clause 4(e)(3) of rule X
    (currently clause 3 of rule XI) requiring meetings of the Committee on
    Ethics 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), (5), (6), and (7) 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 as follows: 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 hearings into the
    committee scheduling service of the House Information Resources; 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 chair with the concurrence of its
    ranking minority member (H. Res. 43, Jan. 31, 1995, p. 3028); and in the
    112th Congress to apply the notice requirement to meetings (sec.
    2(c)(3), H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 2011, p. _). A new subparagraph (4) was
    inserted (and subsequent subparagraphs redesignated) in the 112th
    Congress to require availability of

    [[Page 560]]

    committee markup text (sec.
    2(c)(4), H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 2011, p. _). 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 (5) (then 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) and in the
    112th Congress to require electronic availability of such disclosures
    (sec. 2(c)(7), H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 2011, 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). Gender-based references were
    eliminated in the 111th Congress (sec. 2(l), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, p.
    _). This paragraph was amended in the 112th Congress to reflect a change
    in committee name (sec. 2(e)(8), H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 2011, p. _).
      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 sub

    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.

    [[Page 561]]

    the 104th Congress both of
    those features were deleted from the rule (sec. 207, H. Res. 6, Jan. 4,
    1995, p. 467).
      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 although 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

      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).

    Sec. 800. Reduced quorum.

      (2)  Each committee may fix the
    number of its members to constitute a quorum for taking testimony and
    receiving evidence, which may not be less than two.

      (3) Each committee (other than the Committee on Appropriations, the
    Committee on the Budget, and the Committee on Ways and Means) may fix
    the number of its members to constitute a quorum for taking any action
    other than one for which the presence of a majority of the committee is
    otherwise required, which may not be less than one-third of the members.

      Subparagraphs (2) and (3) (formerly subparagraphs (1) and (2)) were
    adopted in the 84th Congress and only related to the authority of a
    committee to fix a quorum of not less than two for taking testimony (H.
    Res. 151, Mar. 23, 1955, pp. 3569, 3585). In the 95th Congress (H. Res.
    5, Jan. 4, 1977, pp. 53-70) subparagraph (3) (formerly subparagraph (2))
    was added to authorize committees to fix a quorum less than a majority
    for certain other action. Before the House recodified its rules in the
    106th Congress, paragraph (h) consisted only of subparagraphs (2) and
    (3) (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). Subparagraph (3) was amended in
    the 107th Congress to preserve all requirements for a majority quorum
    found in House rules (sec. 2(i), H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 2001, p. 25).

    [[Page 562]]

    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).

      By unanimous consent the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct
    (now Ethics) 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

    Sec. 800a. Postponing votes in committee.

      (4)(A)  Each
    committee may adopt a rule authorizing the chair of a committee or
    subcommittee--

          (i) to postpone further proceedings when a record vote is ordered
    on the question of approving a measure or matter or on adopting an
    amendment; and

          (ii) to resume proceedings on a postponed question at any time
    after reasonable notice.

      (B) A rule adopted pursuant to this subparagraph shall provide that
    when proceedings resume on a postponed question, notwithstanding any
    intervening order for the previous question, an underlying proposition
    shall remain subject to further debate or amendment to the same extent
    as when the question was postponed.

      This subparagraph was added in the 108th Congress (sec. 2(g), H. Res.
    5, Jan. 7, 2003, p. 7). A gender-based reference was eliminated in the
    111th Congress (sec. 2(l), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, p. _).
    Limitation on committee sittings

    801. Committees not to sit.

      (i)  A committee may not sit
    during a joint session of the House and Senate or during a recess when a
    joint meeting of the House and Senate is in progress.

    [[Page 563]]

    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), who controls one hour of debate thereon (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. Although 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,

    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 chair 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.

    [[Page 564]]

    mittee who so desires has
    had an opportunity to question each witness.
      (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 com

      (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.

      (C) A committee may adopt a rule or motion permitting committee staff
    for its majority and minority party members to question a witness for
    equal specified periods. The time for extended questioning of a witness
    under this subdivision shall be equal for the majority party and the
    minority party and may not exceed one hour in the aggregate.

    Hearing procedures
      Paragraph (j)(1) was contained in section 114(b) of the Legislative
    Reorganization Act of 1970 (84 Stat. 1140) and was made a part of the
    rules in the 92d Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 22, 1971, p. 144). Paragraph
    (j)(2) was added to the rules on that latter date. Although 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 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). A gender-based reference was
    eliminated in the 111th Congress (sec. 2(l), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, p.
    _).

    [[Page 565]]

    803. Hearing procedure.

      (k)(1)  The chair 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 chair may punish breaches of order and decorum, and of
    professional ethics on the part of counsel, by censure and exclusion
    from the hearings; and the committee may cite the offender to the House
    for contempt.

      (5) Whenever it is asserted by a member of the committee that the
    evidence or testimony at a hearing may tend to defame, degrade, or
    incriminate any person, or it is asserted by a witness that the evidence
    or testimony that the witness would give at a hearing may tend to
    defame, degrade, or incriminate the witness--

          (A) notwithstanding paragraph (g)(2), such testimony or evidence
    shall be presented in executive session if, in the presence of the
    number of members required under the rules of the committee for the
    purpose of taking testimony, the committee determines by vote of a
    majority of those present that such evidence or testimony may tend to
    defame, degrade, or incriminate any person; and

    [[Page 566]]

    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.
          (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.

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

      (7) Evidence or testimony taken in executive session, and proceedings
    conducted in executive session, may be released or used in public
    sessions only when authorized by the committee, a majority being
    present.

      (8) In the discretion of the committee, witnesses may submit brief and
    pertinent sworn statements in writing for inclusion in the record. The
    committee is the sole judge of the pertinence of testimony and evidence
    adduced at its hearing.

      (9) A witness may obtain a transcript copy of the testimony of such
    witness given at a public session or, if given at an executive session,
    when authorized by the committee.

    [[Page 567]]

    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 that witness) 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).
    Gender-based references were eliminated in the 111th Congress (sec.
    2(l), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, p. _).
      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 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

    Supplemental, minority, or additional views
      The requirements of clause 2(g)(1) and (2), and of 2(m)(2)(A), of this
    rule that a majority of the committee or subcommittee shall constitute a
    quorum for the purposes of closing meetings or hearings or issuing
    subpoenas have been construed to require, under clause 2(k)(7) of this
    rule, that a majority shall likewise constitute a quorum to release or
    make public any evidence or testimony received in any closed meeting or
    hearing and any other executive session record of the committee or
    subcommittee. See also clauses 11(c) and 11(g) of rule X, which provide
    that classified material transmitted by the Permanent Select Committee
    on Intelligence to another committee of the House becomes the executive
    session material of the recipient committee by virtue of the nature of
    the material and the injunction of clause 11(g) of rule X, which
    prohibits disclosure of information provided to committees or Members of
    the House except in a secret session. For a discussion of questions of
    the privileges of the House addressing committee hearing procedure, see
    Sec. 704, supra.

    [[Page 568]]

    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.

    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

    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.

    [[Page 569]]

      (2) The chair of the committee, or a member designated by the chair,
    may administer oaths to witnesses.

      (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 chair of the committee under
    such rules and under such limitations as the committee may prescribe.
    Authorized subpoenas shall be signed by the chair of the committee or by
    a member designated by the committee.

      (ii) In the case of a subcommittee of the Committee on Ethics, a
    subpoena may be authorized and issued only by an affirmative vote of a
    majority of its members.

      (B) A subpoena duces tecum may specify terms of return other than at a
    meeting or hearing of the committee or subcommittee authorizing the
    subpoena.

      (C) Compliance with a subpoena issued by a committee or subcommittee
    under subparagraph (1)(B) may be enforced only as authorized or directed
    by the House.

    [[Page 570]]

    the chair 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 chair 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 Ethics
    (formerly 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). Gender-based
    references were eliminated in the 111th Congress (sec. 2(l), H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 6, 2009, p. _). This paragraph was amended in the 112th Congress to
    reflect a change in committee name (sec. 2(e)(8), H. Res. 5, Jan. 5,
    2011, p. _).
      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

      A subpoena issued under this clause need only be signed by the chair
    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 the Speaker's hand and seal, and it
    must be attested by the Clerk pursuant to clause 2(d) 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 chair 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 the House
    of Congress of which a Member, or any committee thereof.

    [[Page 571]]

    such authority must
    be conferred by separate action of the House (see Sec. 800, supra).

      Although under this clause the Committee on Ethics 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 chair 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. Except in the case of the Committee on Oversight and
    Government Reform under clause 4(c) of rule X,

    Sec. 805a. Certain hearings required.

      (n)(1)  Each standing
    committee, or a subcommittee thereof, shall hold at least one hearing
    during each 120-day period following the establishment of the committee
    on the topic of waste, fraud, abuse, or mismanagement in Government
    programs which that committee may authorize.

      (2) A hearing described in subparagraph (1) shall include a focus on
    the most egregious instances of waste, fraud, abuse, or mismanagement as
    documented by any report the committee has received from a Federal
    Office of the Inspector General or the Comptroller General of the United
    States.

      (o) Each committee, or a subcommittee thereof, shall hold at least one
    hearing in any session in which the committee has received disclaimers
    of agency financial statements from auditors of any Federal agency that
    the committee may authorize to hear testimony on such disclaimers from
    representatives of any such agency.

      (p) Each standing committee, or a subcommittee thereof, shall hold at
    least one hearing on issues raised by reports issued by the Comptroller
    General of the United States indicating that Federal programs or
    operations that the committee may authorize are at high risk for waste,
    fraud, and mismanagement, known as the ``high-risk list'' or the ``high-
    risk series.''

    [[Page 572]]

    Committee on Ethics
      Paragraphs (n), (o), and (p) were added in the 111th Congress (H. Res.
    40, Jan. 14, 2009, p. _).

    806. Ethics; additional duties.

      3. (a) The  Committee on
    Ethics has the following functions:

          (1) The committee may recommend to the House from time to time
    such administrative actions as it may consider appropriate to establish
    or enforce standards of official conduct for Members, Delegates, the
    Resident Commissioner, officers, and employees of the House. A letter of
    reproval or other administrative action of the committee pursuant to an
    investigation under subparagraph (2) shall only be issued or implemented
    as a part of a report required by such subparagraph.

    [[Page 573]]

          (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 the duties or the discharge of the responsibilities
    of such individual. 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.

          (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 the duties or the discharge of the responsibilities of
    such individual 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.

    [[Page 574]]

          (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.

          (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 Ethics 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 chair
    and ranking minority member jointly may appoint members to serve as an
    investigative subcommittee.

    [[Page 575]]

    formation 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.
      (ii) The chair and ranking minority member of the committee jointly
    may gather additional in

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

          (A) upon receipt of information offered as a complaint, in writing
    and under oath, from a Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner and
    transmitted to the committee by such Member, Delegate, or Resident
    Commissioner;

          (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 such Member, Delegate, or
    Resident Commissioner believes the information is submitted in good
    faith and warrants the review and consideration of the committee; or

    [[Page 576]]

    Committee on Ethics, the chair 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 chair 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.
          (C) upon receipt of a report regarding a referral from the board
    of the Office of Congressional Ethics.
    If a complaint is not disposed of within the applicable periods set
    forth in the rules of the

      (3) The committee may not undertake an investigation of an alleged
    violation of a law, rule, regulation, or standard of conduct that was
    not in effect at the time of the alleged violation. The committee may
    not undertake an investigation of such an alleged violation that
    occurred before the third previous Congress unless the committee
    determines that the alleged violation is directly related to an alleged
    violation that occurred in a more recent Congress.

    [[Page 577]]

      (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.

      (5) A member of the committee may seek disqualification 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
    chair shall so notify the Speaker and request the Speaker to designate a
    Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner from the same political party
    as the disqualifying member to act in any proceeding of the committee
    relating to that case.

      (6) Information or testimony received, or the contents of a complaint
    or the fact of its filing, may not be publicly disclosed by any
    committee or staff member unless specifically authorized in each
    instance by a vote of the full committee.

      (7) The committee shall have the functions designated in titles I and
    V of the Ethics in Government Act of 1978, in sections 7342, 7351, and
    7353 of title 5, United States Code, and in clause 11(g)(4) of rule X.

    [[Page 578]]

    board
    pursuant to a request under paragraph (r), the chair of the Committee on
    Ethics shall make public the written report and findings of the board
    unless the chair and ranking member, acting jointly, decide or the
    committee votes to withhold such information for not more than one
    additional period of the same duration, in which case the chair shall--
      (8)(A) Except as provided by subdivisions (B), (C), and (D), not later
    than 45 calendar days or 5 legislative days, whichever is later, after
    receipt of a written report and any findings and supporting
    documentation regarding a referral from the board of the Office of
    Congressional Ethics or of a referral of the matter from the

          (i) upon the termination of such additional period, make public
    the written report and findings; and

          (ii) upon the day of such decision or vote, make a public
    statement that the committee has voted to extend the matter relating to
    the referral made by the board of the Office of Congressional Ethics
    regarding the Member, officer, or employee of the House who is the
    subject of the applicable referral.
    At least one calendar day before the committee makes public any written
    report and findings of the board, the chair shall notify such board and
    the applicable Member, officer, or employee of that fact and transmit to
    such individual a copy of the statement on the committee's disposition
    of, and any committee report on, the matter.

    [[Page 579]]

    previous sentence,
    a vote by the committee to dismiss a matter is not inconsistent with a
    report from the board respecting the matter as unresolved due to a tie
    vote.
      (B)(i) Notwithstanding subdivision (A)(i), if the committee votes to
    dismiss a matter which is the subject of a referral from the board of
    the Office of Congressional Ethics, the committee is not required to
    make public the written report and findings described in such
    subdivision unless the committee's vote is inconsistent with the
    recommendation of the board. For purposes of the

      (ii) Notwithstanding subdivision (A)(ii), if the board transmits a
    report respecting any matter with a recommendation to dismiss or as
    unresolved due to a tie vote, and the committee votes to extend the
    matter for an additional period as provided in subdivision (A), the
    committee is not required to make a public statement that the committee
    has voted to extend the matter.

      (iii) Except as provided by subdivision (E), if the committee
    establishes an investigative subcommittee respecting any such matter,
    then the report and findings of the board shall not be made public until
    the conclusion of the investigative subcommittee process and the
    committee shall issue a public statement of the establishment of an
    investigative subcommittee, which statement shall include the name of
    the applicable Member, officer, or employee, and shall set forth the
    alleged violation. If any such investigative subcommittee does not
    conclude its review within one year after the board transmits a report
    respecting any matter, then the committee shall make public the report
    and upon the expiration of the Congress in which the report is made
    public, the committee shall make public any findings.

    [[Page 580]]

    Congressional Ethics or of a referral of the matter from
    the board pursuant to a request under paragraph (r), the committee
    agrees to a request from an appropriate law enforcement or regulatory
    authority to defer taking action on the matter--
      (C)(i) If, after receipt of a written report and any findings and
    supporting documentation regarding a referral from the board of the
    Office of

          (I) notwithstanding subdivision (A)(i), the committee is not
    required to make public the written report and findings described in
    such subdivision, except that if the recommendation of the board with
    respect to the report is that the matter requires further review, the
    committee shall make public the written report but not the findings; and

          (II) before the end of the first day (excluding Saturdays,
    Sundays, and public holidays) after the day that the committee agrees to
    the request, the committee shall make a public statement that it is
    deferring taking action on the matter at the request of such authority.

      (ii) If, upon the expiration of the one-year period that begins on the
    date the committee makes the public statement described in item (i)(II),
    the committee has not acted on the matter, the committee shall make a
    new public statement that it is still deferring taking action on the
    matter, and shall make a new statement upon the expiration of each
    succeeding one-year period during which the committee has not acted on
    the matter.

    [[Page 581]]

    local election in which the subject of the referral is a
    candidate. The committee may delay any reporting requirement under this
    subparagraph that falls within that 60-day period until the end of such
    period and in that case, for purposes of subdivision (A), days within
    the 60-day period shall not be counted.
      (D) The committee may not receive any referral from the board of the
    Office of Congressional Ethics within 60 days before a Federal, State,
    or

      (E) If, at the close of any applicable period for a reporting
    requirement under this subparagraph with respect to a referral from the
    board of the Office of Congressional Ethics, the vote of the committee
    is a tie or the committee fails to act, the report and the findings of
    the board shall be made public by the committee, along with a public
    statement by the chair explaining the status of the matter.

      (c)(1) Notwithstanding clause 2(g)(1) of rule XI, each meeting of the
    Committee on Ethics 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 Ethics
    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 582]]

    clause 5(a)(4) of rule X and shared staff, may have access to
    information that is confidential under the rules of the committee, the
    following oath (or affirmation) shall be executed:
      (d) Before a member, officer, or employee of the Committee on Ethics,
    including members of a subcommittee of the committee selected under

          ``I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will not disclose, to any
    person or entity outside the Committee on Ethics, 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 Ethics 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 Ethics, 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 Ethics.

    [[Page 583]]

    ing 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 seek
    disqualification 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 was further amended in the 105th
    Congress to permit the chair and rank

      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 584]]

    2007, p. 19). Paragraphs (b)(2)(C) and (b)(8) were added in the
    110th Congress (H. Res. 895, Mar. 11, 2008, p. _). Gender-based
    references were eliminated in the 111th Congress, and paragraph (b)(5)
    was amended to clarify the disqualification process (sec. 2(l), H. Res.
    5, Jan. 6, 2009, p. _). Amendments were effected in the 112th Congress
    to reflect a change in committee name (sec. 2(e)(8), H. Res. 5, Jan. 5,
    2011, p. _). Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th
    Congress, this provision was found in former clause 4(e) of rule X and
    paragraph (b)(7) was found in former clause 1(p) of rule X (H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).
      Additional amendments to this provision were adopted in the 105th
    Congress as follows: (1) paragraphs (d) and (e) (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). Paragraph (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,

      In the 110th, 111th, and 112th Congresses, the House directed 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. _; sec. 4(e), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, p. _;
    sec. 4(d), H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 2011, p. _).

    Committee agendas
      In the 110th Congress, the House adopted a resolution establishing an
    independent Office of Congressional Ethics to investigate individually-
    initiated alleged ethics violations and to report its recommendations to
    the Committee (Mar. 11, 2008, p. _). The 111th and 112th Congresses re-
    established the office with a modification on its authority to engage
    consultants (sec. 4(d), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, p. _; sec. 4(c), H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 5, 2011, p. _).

    806a. Ethics; committee rules.

      (f)  The committee shall
    adopt rules providing that the chair 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;

    [[Page 585]]

          (B) each member of the staff shall be professional and
    demonstrably qualified for the position for which hired;

          (C) the staff as a whole and each member of the staff shall
    perform all official duties in a nonpartisan manner;

          (D) no member of the staff shall engage in any partisan political
    activity directly affecting any congressional or presidential election;

          (E) no member of the staff or outside counsel may accept public
    speaking engagements or write for publication on any subject that is in
    any way related to the employment or duties with the committee of such
    individual without specific prior approval from the chair and ranking
    minority member; and

          (F) no member of the staff or outside counsel may make public,
    unless approved by an affirmative vote of a majority of the members of
    the committee, any information, document, or other material that is
    confidential, derived from executive session, or classified and that is
    obtained during the course of employment with the committee.

      (2) Only subdivisions (C), (E), and (F) of subparagraph (1) shall
    apply to shared staff.

      (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.

    [[Page 586]]

    mines, by an
    affirmative vote of a majority of the members of the committee, that the
    retention of outside counsel is necessary and appropriate.
      (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 deter

      (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 chair and ranking minority
    member each may appoint one individual as a shared staff member from the
    respective personal staff of the chair or ranking minority member to
    perform service for the committee. Such shared staff may assist the
    chair or ranking minority member on any subcommittee on which the chair
    or ranking minority member serves.
    Meetings and hearings

      (h)(1) The committee shall adopt rules providing that--

    [[Page 587]]

    committee, shall occur in
    executive session unless the committee or subcommittee by an affirmative
    vote of a majority of its members opens the meeting or hearing to the
    public; and
          (A) all meetings or hearings of the committee or any subcommittee
    thereof, other than any hearing held by an adjudicatory subcommittee or
    any sanction hearing held by the

          (B) any hearing held by an adjudicatory subcommittee or any
    sanction hearing held by the committee shall be open to the public
    unless the committee or subcommittee by an affirmative vote of a
    majority of its members closes the hearing to the public.
    Public disclosure

      (i) The committee shall adopt rules providing that, unless otherwise
    determined by a vote of the committee, only the chair or ranking
    minority member, after consultation with each other, may make public
    statements regarding matters before the committee or any subcommittee
    thereof.
    Requirements to constitute a complaint

    [[Page 588]]

    Duties of chair and ranking minority member regarding properly filed
      (j) The committee shall adopt rules regarding complaints to provide
    that whenever information offered as a complaint is submitted to the
    committee, the chair and ranking minority member shall have 14 calendar
    days or five legislative days, whichever is sooner, to determine whether
    the information meets the requirements of the rules of the committee for
    what constitutes a complaint.

            complaints

      (k)(1) The committee shall adopt rules providing that whenever the
    chair 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 589]]

    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 chair or
    ranking minority member places on the agenda the issue of whether to
    establish an investigative subcommittee, then an investigative
    subcommittee may be established only by an affirmative vote of a
    majority of the members of the committee.
    Duties of chair and ranking minority member regarding information not
      (2) The committee shall adopt rules providing that if the chair 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

            constituting a complaint

      (l) The committee shall adopt rules providing that whenever the chair
    and ranking minority member jointly determine that information submitted
    to the committee does not meet the requirements of the rules of the
    committee for what constitutes a complaint, they may--

          (1) return the information to the complainant with a statement
    that it fails to meet the requirements of the rules of the committee for
    what constitutes a complaint; or

    [[Page 590]]

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

      (m) The committee shall adopt rules providing that--

          (1)(A) an investigative subcommittee shall be composed of four
    Members (with equal representation from the majority and minority
    parties) whenever such a subcommittee is established pursuant to the
    rules of the committee;

          (B) an adjudicatory subcommittee shall be composed of the members
    of the committee who did not serve on the pertinent investigative
    subcommittee (with equal representation from the majority and minority
    parties) whenever such a subcommittee is established pursuant to the
    rules of the committee; and

          (C) notwithstanding any other provision of this clause, the chair
    and ranking minority member of the committee may consult with an
    investigative subcommittee either on their own initiative or on the
    initiative of the subcommittee, shall have access to information before
    a subcommittee with which they so consult, and shall not thereby be
    precluded from serving as full, voting members of any adjudicatory
    subcommittee;

    [[Page 591]]

          (2) at the time of appointment, the chair shall designate one
    member of a subcommittee to serve as chair and the ranking minority
    member shall designate one member of the subcommittee to serve as the
    ranking minority member; and

          (3) the chair and ranking minority member of the committee may
    serve as members of an investigative subcommittee, but may not serve as
    non-voting, ex officio members.
    Standard of proof for adoption of statement of alleged violation

      (n) The committee shall adopt rules to provide that an investigative
    subcommittee may adopt a statement of alleged violation only if it
    determines by an affirmative vote of a majority of the members of the
    subcommittee that there is substantial reason to believe that a
    violation of the Code of Official Conduct, or of a law, rule,
    regulation, or other standard of conduct applicable to the performance
    of official duties or the discharge of official responsibilities by a
    Member, officer, or employee of the House of Representatives, has
    occurred.
    Subcommittee powers

      (o)(1) The committee shall adopt rules providing that an investigative
    subcommittee or an adjudicatory subcommittee may authorize and issue
    subpoenas only when authorized by an affirmative vote of a majority of
    the members of the subcommittee.

    [[Page 592]]

      (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 when approved by an affirmative
    vote of a majority of the members of the committee.

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

          (A) an investigative subcommittee may, upon an affirmative vote of
    a majority of its members, amend its statement of alleged violation
    anytime before the statement of alleged violation is transmitted to the
    committee; and

          (B) if an investigative subcommittee amends its statement of
    alleged violation, the respondent shall be notified in writing and shall
    have 30 calendar days from the date of that notification to file an
    answer to the amended statement of alleged violation.
    Due process rights of respondents

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

    [[Page 593]]

    that
    evidence is being withheld and of the count to which such evidence
    relates;
          (1) not less than 10 calendar days before a scheduled vote by an
    investigative subcommittee on a statement of alleged violation, the
    subcommittee shall provide the respondent with a copy of the statement
    of alleged violation it intends to adopt together with all evidence it
    intends to use to prove those charges which it intends to adopt,
    including documentary evidence, witness testimony, memoranda of witness
    interviews, and physical evidence, unless the subcommittee by an
    affirmative vote of a majority of its members decides to withhold
    certain evidence in order to protect a witness; but if such evidence is
    withheld, the subcommittee shall inform the respondent

          (2) neither the respondent nor the counsel of the respondent
    shall, directly or indirectly, contact the subcommittee or any member
    thereof during the period of time set forth in paragraph (1) except for
    the sole purpose of settlement discussions where counsel for the
    respondent and the subcommittee are present;

          (3) if, at any time after the issuance of a statement of alleged
    violation, the committee or any subcommittee thereof determines that it
    intends to use evidence not provided to a respondent under paragraph (1)
    to prove the charges contained in the statement of alleged violation (or
    any amendment thereof), such evidence shall be made immediately
    available to the respondent, and it may be used in any further
    proceeding under the rules of the committee;

          (4) evidence provided pursuant to paragraph (1) or (3) shall be
    made available to the respondent and the counsel of the respondent only
    after each agrees, in writing, that no document, information, or other
    materials obtained pursuant to that paragraph shall be made public
    until--

    [[Page 594]]

              (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 the counsel of the respondent 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 chair and ranking minority member determine that
    information the committee has received constitutes a complaint;

              (B) a complaint or allegation is transmitted to an
    investigative subcommittee;

              (C) an investigative subcommittee votes to authorize its first
    subpoena or to take testimony under oath, whichever occurs first; or

              (D) an investigative subcommittee votes to expand the scope of
    its investigation;

          (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 chair
    and ranking minority member of the subcommittee, and the outside
    counsel, if any;

    [[Page 595]]

    ent 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
          (7) statements or information derived solely from a respondent or
    the counsel of a respond

          (8) whenever a motion to establish an investigative subcommittee
    does not prevail, the committee shall promptly send a letter to the
    respondent informing the respondent of such vote.
    Committee reporting requirements

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

          (1) whenever an investigative subcommittee does not adopt a
    statement of alleged violation and transmits a report to that effect to
    the committee, the committee may by an affirmative vote of a majority of
    its members transmit such report to the House of Representatives;

          (2) whenever an investigative subcommittee adopts a statement of
    alleged violation, the respondent admits to the violations set forth in
    such statement, the respondent waives the right to an adjudicatory
    hearing, and the respondent's waiver is approved by the committee--

    [[Page 596]]

    fore the subcommittee
    votes on whether to adopt the report;
              (A) the subcommittee shall prepare a report for transmittal to
    the committee, a final draft of which shall be provided to the
    respondent not less than 15 calendar days be

              (B) the respondent may submit views in writing regarding the
    final draft to the subcommittee within seven calendar days of receipt of
    that draft;

              (C) the subcommittee shall transmit a report to the committee
    regarding the statement of alleged violation together with any views
    submitted by the respondent pursuant to subdivision (B), and the
    committee shall make the report together with the respondent's views
    available to the public before the commencement of any sanction hearing;
    and

              (D) the committee shall by an affirmative vote of a majority
    of its members issue a report and transmit such report to the House of
    Representatives, together with the respondent's views previously
    submitted pursuant to subdivision (B) and any additional views
    respondent may submit for attachment to the final report; and

          (3) members of the committee shall have not less than 72 hours to
    review any report transmitted to the committee by an investigative
    subcommittee before both the commencement of a sanction hearing and the
    committee vote on whether to adopt the report.

    [[Page 597]]

    investigating such matter, the committee may at
    any time so notify the board and request that the board cease its review
    and refer the matter to the committee for its consideration. If at the
    end of the applicable time period (including any permissible extension)
    the committee has not reached a final resolution of the matter or has
    not referred the matter to the appropriate Federal or State authorities,
    the committee shall so notify the board of the Office of Congressional
    Ethics in writing. The committee may not request the same matter from
    the board more than one time.

      (r) Upon receipt of any written notification from the board of the
    Office of Congressional Ethics that the board is undertaking a review of
    any alleged conduct of any Member, officer, or employee of the House and
    if the committee is

    [[Page 598]]

    to paragraph (o)(2) was effected in the 112th
    Congress (sec. 2(f), H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 2011, p. _).
      In the 105th Congress a 12-member bipartisan task force was informally
    appointed by the Majority and Minority Leaders to conduct a
    comprehensive review of the House ethics process. At the same time an
    order of the House was adopted imposing a moratorium on filing or
    processing ethics complaints and on raising certain questions of
    privilege under rule IX with respect to official conduct. The moratorium
    was imposed with the expectation that the recommendations of the task
    force would include changes relating to the Committee on Standards of
    Official Conduct (now Ethics) 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. 43). 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. 8045). Paragraph (r) was added in the 110th Congress (H.
    Res. 895, Mar. 11, 2008, p. _). Gender-based references were eliminated
    in the 111th Congress (sec. 2(l), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, p. _). A
    technical amendment

      Section 803 of the Ethics Reform Act of 1989 (2 U.S.C. 29d) contains
    several free-standing provisions, which are carried in this annotation.
    The requirement that the respective party caucuses nominate seven
    majority and seven minority members should be read in light of clause 5
    of rule X, setting the composition of the committee at 10, five from the
    majority and five from the minority. The requirement that the committee
    adopt rules establishing investigative and adjudicative subcommittees
    should be read in light of clause 3(m), which constitutes the same
    requirement. The references to clause 5(d) of rule XI applied to a
    former rule regarding minority staffing requirements, which was
    eliminated in the 104th Congress (sec. 101(c)(5), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4,
    1995, p. 462).

     ``Sec. 803. Reforms Respecting the Committee on Standards of Official
                                   __________

                                   Conduct.--

                                      * * *

      ``(b) committee composition.--The respective party caucus or
    conference of the House of Representatives shall each nominate to the
    House of Representatives at the beginning of each Congress 7 members to
    serve on the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct.

      ``(c) investigative subcommittees.--The Committee on Standards of
    Official Conduct shall adopt rules providing--

              ``(1) for the establishment of a 4 or 6-member investigative

            subcommittee (with equal representation from the majority and

            minority parties) whenever the committee votes to undertake any

            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

    [[Page 599]]

    committee to hold a disciplinary hearing on
            adjudicatory sub

            the violation alleged in the statement;

              ``(3) that any statement of alleged violation and any written

            response thereto shall be made public at the first meeting or

            hearing on the matter which is open to the public after the

            respondent has been given full opportunity to respond to the

            statement in accordance with committee rules, but, if no public

            hearing or meeting is held on the matter, the statement of

            alleged violation and any written response thereto shall be

            included in the committee's final report to the House of

            Representatives as required by clause 4(e)(1)(B) of rule X of

            the Rules of the House of Representatives;

              ``(4) that a quorum for an adjudicatory subcommittee for the

            purpose of taking testimony and conducting any business shall

            consist of a majority of the membership of the subcommittee plus

            one; and

              ``(5) that an adjudicatory subcommittee shall determine, after

            receiving evidence, whether the counts in the statement have

            been proved and shall report its findings to the committee.
    ``Clause 5(d) of rule XI of the Rules of the House of Representatives
    shall not apply to any adjudicatory subcommittee.

                                      * * *

      ``(i) advice and education.--(1) The Committee on Standards of
    Official Conduct shall establish within the Committee an Office on
    Advice and Education (hereinafter in this subsection referred to as the
    `Office') under the supervision of the chairman.

              ``(2) The Office shall be headed by a director who shall be

            appointed by the chairman, in consultation with the ranking

            minority member, and shall be comprised of such staff as the

            chairman determines is necessary to carry out the

            responsibilities of the Office.

              ``(3) The primary responsibilities of the Office shall

            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

    [[Page 600]]

                    conduct applicable to them.

              ``(4) No information provided to the Committee on Standards of

            Official Conduct by a Member, officer or employee of the House

            of Representatives when seeking advice regarding prospective

            conduct of such Member, officer or employee may be used as the

            basis for initiating an investigation under clause 4(e)(1)(B) of

            rule X of the Rules of the House of Representatives, if such

            Member, officer or employee acts in accordance with the written

            advice of the committee.''.

                                   __________

      On occasions in which 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, 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 chair of the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct (now
    Ethics) 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 chair 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 601]]

    ceeding relating to that member's official conduct. Upon
    notification to the Speaker of such ineligibility, the Speaker
    designates another Member of the same political party as the ineligible
    member to serve on the committee during proceedings relating to that
    conduct (Speaker O'Neill, Feb. 5, 1980, p. 1908; July 23, 1996, p.
    18596). Under clause 3(b)(5) (formerly clause 4(e)(2)(E) of rule X), a
    member of the committee may be recused from serving on the committee
    during proceedings relating to a pending investigation by submitting an
    affidavit of disqualification to the committee stating that the member
    cannot render an impartial and unbiased decision relating to that
    investigation. If the committee accepts the affidavit, the chair
    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 Ethics is ineligible to participate in a committee
    pro

    Audio and visual coverage of committee proceedings
      The committee has compiled statutory and rule-based ethical standards
    in the House Ethics Manual (110th 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.

    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 602]]

    and its committees, the
    consideration thereof, and the action taken thereon; and
          (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

          (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 603]]

    general work of the
    committee or of the House; or
          (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

          (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 chair 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 604]]

    vision cameras permitted by a committee or
    subcommittee chair in a hearing or meeting room shall be in accordance
    with fair and equitable procedures devised by the Executive Committee of
    the Radio and Television Correspondents' Galleries.
          (2) The allocation among the television media of the positions or
    the number of tele

          (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.

    [[Page 605]]

          (B) The television media may install additional lighting in a
    hearing or meeting room, without cost to the Government, in order to
    raise the ambient lighting level in a hearing or meeting room to the
    lowest level necessary to provide adequate television coverage of a
    hearing or meeting at the current state of the art of television
    coverage.

          (7) If requests are made by more of the media than will be
    permitted by a committee or subcommittee chair 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.

    Sec. 811. Press photographers.

          (8)  Photographers may not
    position themselves between the witness table and the members of the
    committee at any time during the course of a hearing or meeting.

          (9) Photographers may not place themselves in positions that
    obstruct unnecessarily the coverage of the hearing by the other media.

          (10) Personnel providing coverage by the television and radio
    media shall be currently accredited to the Radio and Television
    Correspondents' Galleries.

    Sec. 812. Accreditation.

          (11)  Personnel providing
    coverage by still photography shall be currently accredited to the Press
    Photographers' Gallery.

          (12) Personnel providing coverage by the television and radio
    media and by still photography shall conduct themselves and their
    coverage activities in an orderly and unobtrusive manner.

    [[Page 606]]

    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
    chair with the discretion to determine the appropriate number (H. Res.
    7, Jan. 3, 1985, p. 393). Paragraph (f)(7) was amended in the 112th
    Congress to remove obsolete references to news organizations (sec.
    2(e)(3), H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 2011, p. _). 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 chairs from limiting coverage to less than two
    representatives from each medium, except if 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). Gender-based references were eliminated in the 111th Congress
    (sec. 2(l), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, p. _). Before the House recodified
    its rules in the 106th Congress, this provision was found in former
    clause 3 of rule XI (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

    Pay of witnesses
      The rule permitting broadcasting of committee hearings was contained
    in section 116(b) of the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1970 (84
    Stat. 1140) and became part of the rules in the 92d Congress (H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 22, 1971, p. 144). In the 93d Congress, the rule was amended to
    permit committees to adopt rules allowing coverage of committee meetings
    as well as hearings(H. Res. 1107, July 22, 1974, p. 24447). Paragraphs
    (e), (f)(3), (f)(5), and (f)(8) of this clause were amended in the 99th
    Congress to remove

    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 607]]

    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, 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

    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 limitation. 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).

     end segment .008 segment .009 -- rule XII through rule XIV

    [[Page 608]]

      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 if one House asks a conference at one session the other
    may agree to it in the next session (V, 6286). Where bills were enrolled
    and signed by the presiding officers of the two Houses at the close of
    one session they were sent to the President and approved at the
    beginning of the next session (IV, 3486-3488).

                                    Rule XII

    Messages
                  receipt and referral of measures and matters

    815. Entry of messages in the Journal and
    Record.

      1.  Messages received from the Senate, or from the President,
    shall be entered on the Journal and published in the Congressional
    Record of the proceedings of that day.

      This provision was adopted in 1867 and amended in 1880 (V, 6593). It
    was renumbered January 3, 1953 (p. 24). Before the House recodified its
    rules in the 106th Congress, this provision was found in former rule
    XXXIX (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

    Referral
      The House may receive a message from the Senate when the Senate is not
    in session (VIII, 3338).

    816. Referral procedures.

      2.  (a) The Speaker shall refer
    each bill, resolution, or other matter that relates to a subject listed
    under a standing committee named in clause 1 of rule X in accordance
    with the provisions of this clause.

    [[Page 609]]

      (b) The Speaker shall refer matters under paragraph (a) in such manner
    as to ensure to the maximum extent feasible that each committee that has
    jurisdiction under clause 1 of rule X over the subject matter of a
    provision thereof may consider such provision and report to the House
    thereon. Precedents, rulings, or procedures in effect before the Ninety-
    Fourth Congress shall be applied to referrals under this clause only to
    the extent that they will contribute to the achievement of the
    objectives of this clause.

      (c) In carrying out paragraphs (a) and (b) with respect to the
    referral of a matter, the Speaker--

          (1) shall designate a committee of primary jurisdiction (except
    where the Speaker 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 610]]

    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, Space, 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. A gender-based reference was eliminated in the
    111th Congress (sec. 2(l), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, p. _). Before the
    House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this provision was
    found in former clause 5 of rule X (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).
      This provision became effective as part of the rules on January 3,
    1975 (H. Res. 988, 93d Cong., Oct. 8, 1974, p. 34470). Before that time
    a bill or resolution could not be divided for reference among two or
    more committees, although it contained matter properly within the
    jurisdiction of several committees (IV, 4361). Paragraph (c) was amended
    on January 4, 1977 (H. Res. 5, pp. 53-70) to authorize the Speaker to
    place an appropriate time limit for consideration by the first committee
    or committees to which referred. In the 104th Congress paragraph (c) was
    again amended to require the Speaker to initially designate a committee
    of primary jurisdiction

      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, Nov. 26, 1991, p. 35840, extended by unanimous consent on Jan. 22,
    1992, p. 149, and Jan. 28, 1992, p. 745; H. Res. 619, Dec. 16, 2005, p.
    29054, amended by H. Res. 640, Dec. 18, 2005, p. 30378; H. Res. 877,
    Dec. 18, 2007, p. _).

    [[Page 611]]

    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 clause 2 of rule XIV (formerly clause 2 of rule XXIV),
    relating to messages from the Senate, the Speaker 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. The Speaker 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 612]]

    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
    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 the 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); (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 if 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 613]]

    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 the authority under paragraph (c)(4), the Speaker may
    refer a bill to a special ad hoc committee appointed by the Speaker 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 614]]

    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. 19). 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 615]]

    vate bill (except when
    judged by the 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, the
    Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner shall sign it, deliver it to
    the Clerk, and may specify the reference or disposition to be made
    thereof. Such petition, memorial, or pri

      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). A gender-based reference was
    eliminated in the 111th Congress (sec. 2(l), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, p.
    _). 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 another State (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 616]]

    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 the 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 617]]

      (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 resolving
    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 618]]

    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 where 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 619]]

      (b)(1) The 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 sponsor. Such a request may be
    submitted to the Speaker at any time until the last committee authorized
    to consider and report the bill or resolution reports it to the House or
    is discharged from its consideration.

      (2) The name of a cosponsor of a bill or resolution may be deleted by
    unanimous consent. The Speaker may entertain such a request only by the
    Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner whose name is to be deleted
    or by the 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 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 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, and in the 112th Congress
    paragraph (b) 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; sec.
    2(f), H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 2011, p. _). 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 620]]

    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. 20566). In the 109th through 111th Congresses the
    House adopted the same initial order but for the entire Congress (sec.
    3(c), H. Res. 5, Jan. 4, 2005, p. 44; sec. 217, H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 2007,
    p. 19; sec. 3(d), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, p. _) and the House in the
    112th Congress expanded it to reserve the second 10 bill numbers for
    assignment by the Minority Leader (sec. 3(m), H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 2011,
    p. _).
      At its organization for the 106th Congress the House adopted an order
    of the House that the first 10 bill numbers be reserved for assignment
    by the Speaker during a specified period (sec. 2(g), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6,
    1999, p. 47). In the 107th and 108th Congresses the House adopted the
    same

      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 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 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 621]]

    requests to delete Members' names as cosponsors
    are not entertained after the last committee authorized to consider the
    bill has reported to the House (or has been discharged from further
    consideration) (Oct. 8, 1985, p. 26668; Feb. 10, 2000, p. 982), and the
    Speaker has vacated unanimous-consent orders of the House to delete
    cosponsors when advised that the bill had already been reported (Aug. 5,
    1987, p. 22458). A Member may request unanimous consent to 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 to request unanimous consent to be deleted as a
    cosponsor, the sponsor of a measure was permitted to request unanimous
    consent to delete from the permanent Record the name of a cosponsor
    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

      By unanimous consent a Member may be added as a cosponsor of an
    unreported bill if the sponsor is no longer a Member of the House (Aug.
    4, 1983, p. 23188; Oct. 3, 2008, p. _), and a designated Member may be
    authorized to sign and submit lists of additional cosponsors if the
    actual 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.
    18827), but the Chair will not otherwise entertain a request to add
    cosponsors by a Member other than the 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 the 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. 10631; Sept. 14, 2004, p.
    18429).

      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 sponsor (sec. 223(g), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 469);
    and the Speaker stated that all signatures of such ``primary'' sponsors
    would be required on the bills (Speaker Gingrich, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 551).
    A Member was subsequently added as such 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 622]]

    of the House to permit the names of the persons
    requesting the introduction of the bill to be printed in the Record.

      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

    Sec. 826a. Constitutional authority statement upon
    introduction.

      (c)(1)  A bill or joint resolution may not be introduced unless
    the sponsor submits for printing in the Congressional Record a statement
    citing as specifically as practicable the power or powers granted to
    Congress in the Constitution to enact the bill or joint resolution. The
    statement shall appear in a portion of the Record designated for that
    purpose and be made publicly available in electronic form by the Clerk.

      (2) Before consideration of a Senate bill or joint resolution, the
    chair of a committee of jurisdiction may submit the statement required
    under subparagraph (1) as though the chair were the sponsor of the
    Senate bill or joint resolution.

    Executive communications
      Paragraph (c) was added in the 112th Congress (sec. 2(a)(1), H. Res.
    5, Jan. 5, 2011, p. _).

    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.

    [[Page 623]]

      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 31 U.S.C. 1105 they are now included in the budget
    submitted 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.

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

          (3) A Private Calendar as provided in clause 5 of rule XV, to
    which shall be referred all private bills and private resolutions.

    [[Page 624]]

    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).
      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

      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).

      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), the Speaker 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 within
    its jurisdiction by fashioning sequential referrals when appropriate
    (Speaker O'Neill, Apr. 27, 1978, p. 11742; June 19, 1986, p. 14741).

    Sec. 830. Motion to discharge.

      (b)  There is established a
    Calendar of Motions to Discharge Committees as provided in clause 2 of
    rule XV.

    [[Page 625]]

    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. 43). 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. 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) 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 (other than those filed as privileged) 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.

      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), but the 111th Congress reversed an inadvertent
    change to paragraph (a)(2) to restore its application to nonprivileged
    reports only (sec. 2(m), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, p. _) (contrast the
    1999 codification with its predecessor in form; VI, 411).

    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).

    [[Page 626]]

    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.
      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,

      Unless filed with a report pursuant to clause 2(c) or rule XIII,
    minority, supplemental, or additional views may be presented only with
    the consent of the House (IV, 4600; VIII, 2231, 2248).

      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).

    Sec. 834. Chair's duty.

      (b)(1)  It shall be the duty of the
    chair 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.

    [[Page 627]]

    quiry addressed to the head of an executive department.

    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 chair
    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
    in

      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 chair 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). Gender-
    based references were eliminated in the 111th Congress (sec. 2(l), H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, p. _). Before the House recodified its rules in
    the 106th Congress, this provision was found in former clause 2(l)(1) of
    rule XI (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

      Absent a special order of the House, committee reports must be
    submitted while the House is in session, except as permitted under
    clause 2(c) of rule XIII with respect to the guaranteed time for
    composing separate views (see Sec. 836, infra) (Dec. 17, 1982, p.
    31951).

    [[Page 628]]

    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.

    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

    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).

    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.

    [[Page 629]]

    quirement in clause 4 or clause 6 concerning the availability of
    reports.

    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
    re

      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). 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).

      Except as provided in subparagraph (2), a supplemental report is
    subject to three-day availability under clause 4 of this rule (Deschler,
    ch. 17, Sec. 64.1). A committee may file a supplemental report pursuant
    to subparagraph (2) to correct a technical error in the depiction of a
    bill number in the portion of the report regarding congressional
    earmarks, targeted tax benefits, and targeted tariff benefits under
    clause 9 of rule XXI (July 30, 2010, p. _).

    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, and the names of members voting for and
    against, shall be included in the committee report. The preceding
    sentence does not apply to votes taken in executive session by the
    Committee on Ethics.

    [[Page 630]]

    on Rules in the 110th and 111th
    Congresses (sec. 503, H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 2007, p. 19 (adopted Jan. 5,
    2007); sec. 2(c)(10), H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 2011, p. _). This paragraph was
    amended in the 112th Congress to reflect a change in committee name
    (sec. 2(e)(8), H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 2011, p. _). 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 chair
    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, pp. 8417, 8418).

      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 (now Ethics) was adopted in
    the 105th Congress (sec. 8, H. Res. 168, Sept. 18, 1997, p. 19318) and
    expanded to include the Committee

    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.

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

          (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.

    [[Page 631]]

    goals and objectives, for which the
    measure authorizes funding.

          (4) A statement of general performance goals and objectives,
    including outcome-related

      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. Estimate of cost.

      (d)  Each report of a committee
    on a public bill or public joint resolution shall contain the following:

    [[Page 632]]

          (1)(A) An estimate by the committee of the costs that would be
    incurred in carrying out the bill or joint resolution in the fiscal year
    in which it is reported and in each of the five fiscal years following
    that fiscal year (or for the authorized duration of any program
    authorized by the bill or joint resolution if less than five
    years);

          (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.

          (2)(A) In subparagraph (1) 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 (1) does not apply to the Committee on
    Appropriations, the Committee on House Administration, the Committee on
    Rules, or the Committee on Ethics, 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 633]]

    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 (2)(B) (formerly clause 7(d)) was amended to
    reflect a change in committee name (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 effect a technical change (Budget Enforcement Act of 1997
    (sec. 10116, P.L. 105-33)). In the 112th Congress subparagraphs (2) and
    (3) were redesignated when a former subparagraph (1) was repealed (sec.
    2(a)(2), H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 2011, p. _) and subparagraph (2)(B) was
    amended to reflect a change in committee name (sec. 2(e)(8), H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 5, 2011, p. _). 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 (2)(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 if an
    estimate by the Congressional Budget Office is included in the report.
    It was amended by the Budget Enforcement Act of 1990 (2 U.S.C. 900 note)
    to require five-year estimates of revenue changes in legislative
    reports. In the 104th Congress it was amended to require estimates of
    new budget authority, when practicable, to compare the total estimated
    funding for the program

      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. 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 634]]

    Sec. 844. Former constitutional authority requirement
    and inflationary impact requirement.

      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), required an analytical statement of inflationary impact. It
    was converted in the 105th Congress to require a statement of
    constitutional authority (H. Res. 5, Jan. 7, 1997, p. 121) and was
    repealed in the 112th Congress in conjunction with the establishment of
    clause 7(c) of rule XII (sec. 2(a)(2), H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 2011, p. _).
    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. 846. ``Ramseyer Rule.''

      (e)(1)  Whenever a
    committee reports a bill or joint resolution proposing to repeal or
    amend a statute or part thereof, it shall include in its report or in an
    accompanying document--

          (A) the text of a statute or part thereof that is proposed to be
    repealed; and

          (B) a comparative print of any part of the bill or joint
    resolution proposing to amend the statute and of the statute or part
    thereof proposed to be amended, showing by appropriate typographical
    devices the omissions and insertions proposed.

      (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).

    [[Page 635]]

    considered again and
    reported by the committee as if no previous report had been made (VIII,
    2249).
      Technical failure of a committee report to comply with the
    ``Ramseyer'' rule may be remedied by a supplemental report (VIII, 2247).
    Although 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

      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 if such bills include
    legislative provisions (VIII, 2241) and reports on appropriation bills
    are also subject to the requirements of clause 3(f) of rule XIII,
    requiring a concise statement of the effect of any direct or indirect
    changes in the application of existing law. In order to fall within the
    purview of the rule the bill must seek to repeal or amend specifically
    an existing law (VIII, 2235, 2239, 2240).

      Special orders providing for consideration of bills, unless
    specifically waiving points of order, do not preclude the point of order
    that reports on such bills fail to indicate proposed changes in existing
    law (VIII, 2245). The point of order that a report fails to comply with
    the rule is properly made when the bill is called up in the House and
    comes too late after the House has resolved into the Committee of the
    Whole for its consideration (VIII, 2243-2245).

      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

    [[Page 636]]

    penditures 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.

          (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 ex

      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).

    [[Page 637]]

    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.

      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, 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).

    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

    [[Page 638]]

    fore consideration of the bill or joint resolution.

          (B) the chair of the Committee on Ways and Means causes such a tax
    complexity analysis to be printed in the Congressional Record
    be

      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). A gender-based reference was eliminated in
    the 111th Congress (sec. 2(l), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, p. _).

      (2)(A) It shall not be in order to consider a bill or joint resolution
    reported by the Committee on Ways and Means that proposes to amend the
    Internal Revenue Code of 1986 unless--

          (i) the report includes a macroeconomic impact analysis;

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

          (iii) the chair 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

    [[Page 639]]

          (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 chair 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). A gender-
    based reference was eliminated in the 111th Congress (sec. 2(l), H. Res.
    5, Jan. 6, 2009, p. _).

    850. Threeday layover.

      4. (a)(1)  Except as specified in
    subparagraph (2), it shall not be in order to consider in the House a
    measure or matter reported by a committee until the third calendar day
    (excluding Saturdays, Sundays, or legal holidays except when the House
    is in session on such a day) on which each report of a committee on that
    measure or matter has been available to Members, Delegates, and the
    Resident Commissioner.

      (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(k)(1) of rule X reported by the Committee on House
    Administration considered under clause 6 of rule X;

    [[Page 640]]

          (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.

      (b) A committee that reports a measure or matter shall make every
    reasonable effort to have its hearings thereon (if any) printed and
    available for distribution to Members, Delegates, and the Resident
    Commissioner before the consideration of the measure or matter in the
    House.

    [[Page 641]]

    tions 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
    subdivision was deleted as obsolete upon the repeal of the Corrections
    Calendar and in that Congress and in the 112th conforming changes to
    subparagraph (2)(B) were effected (sec. 2(a), H. Res. 5, Jan. 4, 2005,
    p. 42; sec. 2(e)(8), H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 2011, p. _).
      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 correc

      This 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 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).-

    [[Page 642]]

    not constitute questions of the privileges of the
    House, are subject to this clause (Speaker Albert, Mar. 6, 1975, p.
    5537).

    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

    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.

    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.

    [[Page 643]]

    mittee under titles III and IV of the
    Congressional Budget Act of 1974.
          (2) The Committee on the Budget, on the matters required to be
    reported by such com

          (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(k)(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.

          (5) The Committee on Ethics, 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 644]]

    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, 106th, and 112th
    Congresses, it was amended to reflect a change in committee name (sec.
    202(b), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 467; H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47;
    sec. 2(e)(8), H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 2011, p. _). 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). Conforming changes to
    paragraph (a)(3) were effected in the 109th and 112th Congresses (sec.
    2(a) H. Res. 5, Jan. 4, 2005, p. 42; sec. 2(e)(8), H. Res. 5, Jan. 5,
    2011, p. _).
      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.,

    [[Page 645]]

    to the two-
    thirds vote requirement of clause 6 of this rule), and Standards of
    Official Conduct (now Ethics) could call up a matter in the House for
    immediate consideration as soon as the report was filed. Now only
    reports from the Committee on Rules on rules, joint rules, and the order
    of business under clause 6 of this rule; reports from the Committee on
    House Administration on committee expense resolutions under clause 5(a)
    of this rule; reports constituting questions of privilege (see generally
    Deschler, ch. 14, Sec. 7.4, fn. 10, discussing ruling of Speaker Albert,
    July 13, 1971, on a reported contempt); and reports on the official
    conduct of a Member (e.g., H. Res. 31, Jan. 21, 1997, p. 393) are exempt
    from the requirements of former clause 2(l)(6) (current clause 4 of this
    rule) (H. Res. 988, 93d Cong., Oct. 8, 1974, p. 34470). Other committees
    enumerated in this clause may still utilize the privilege after the
    report on the bill or resolution has been available for at least three
    calendar days (excluding Saturdays, Sundays, and legal holidays except
    when the House is in session on such a day). Once called up for
    consideration, the matter so reported remains privileged until disposed
    of (IV, 3145). The House proceeds to the consideration of privileged
    questions only on motion directed to be made by the several committees
    reporting such questions (VIII, 2310). Privileged questions reported
    adversely have the same status so far as their privilege is concerned as
    those reported favorably (VI, 413; VIII, 2310).
      At the time these privileges originated all reports were made on the
    floor, and often with great difficulty because of the pressure of
    business (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

    Sec. 854. Privileged reports defined.

      The  matters reported
    under the provisions of this clause are denominated ``privileged
    reports'' or ``privileged questions,'' and because 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). The Speaker has declined to allow a call
    of committees to be interrupted by a privileged report (IV, 3132). The
    presence of nonprivileged 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 646]]

    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 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

      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).

    [[Page 647]]

    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).
      The right of the Committee on Appropriations to report at any time is
    confined strictly to general appropriation bills (IV, 4629-4632; VIII,

      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 648]]

    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 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). 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).

    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 649]]

      (c) The Committee on Rules may not report 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 joint resolution for which the text of a
    House-passed measure has been substituted.

      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 a 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). In the 111th Congress paragraph (c) was amended to remove
    a restriction on the authority of the committee with regard to Calendar
    Wednesday business under clause 6 of rule XV (sec. 2(e), H. Res. 5, Jan.
    6, 2009, p. _). 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) was
    effected in the 109th Congress (sec. 2(f), H. Res. 5, Jan. 4, 2005, p.
    43), a technical change to paragraph (b) was effected in the 110th
    Congress (sec. 505(b), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 2007, p. 19 (adopted Jan. 5,
    2007)), and a technical change to paragraph (c) was effected in the
    112th Congress (sec. 2(f), H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 2011, p. _). For rulings
    under the earlier form of the rule, see Sec. 859, infra.

    [[Page 650]]

    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).
      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,

      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; H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 4, 2007, p. _).

    [[Page 651]]

    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 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, if 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

      For a discussion of the Speaker's announced policy with respect to
    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 652]]

    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 is accorded priority in 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 thereto without specific authorization from the committee
    (Sept. 25, 1990, p. 25575). A motion to table such a pending amendment
    is dilatory and not in order under this provision, but the motion to
    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; Mar. 11, 2008, p. _) and may be offered
    immediately after the reading of the resolution (Mar. 20, 2002, pp.
    3671, 3672) but may not be made when another Member has the floor (Sept.
    27, 1993, p. 22608). If 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

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

    Sec. 859. Restrictions on authority of Committee on
    Rules.

      From  1934 until the amendment to this provision in the 104th
    Congress (sec. 210, H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 468), it was
    consistently held that the Committee on Rules could recommend a special
    order that limited, but did not totally prohibit, a motion to recommit
    pending passage of a bill or joint resolution, as by precluding the
    motion from containing instructions relating to specified amendments
    (Speaker Rainey, Jan. 11, 1934, pp. 479-83 (sustained on appeal)); or by
    omitting to preserve the availability of amendatory instructions in the
    case that the bill is entirely rewritten by the adoption of a substitute
    made in order as original text (Speaker Foley, June 4, 1991, p. 13170;
    Speaker Foley, Nov. 25, 1991, p. 34460); or by expressly allowing only a
    simple (``straight'') motion to recommit (without instructions) (Oct.
    16, 1990, p. 29657 (sustained by tabling of appeal); Feb. 26, 1992, p.
    3441 (sustained by tabling of appeal); May 7, 1992, p. 10586 (sustained
    by tabling of appeal); June 16, 1992, p. 14973 (sustained by tabling of
    appeal); Nov. 21, 1993, p. 31544; Nov. 22, 1993, p. 31815). A special
    order providing for consideration of a bill under suspension of the
    rules does not prevent a motion to recommit from being made ``as
    provided in clause 4 of rule XVI,'' i.e., after the previous question is
    ordered on passage, a procedure not applicable to a motion to suspend
    the rules (VIII, 2267; Speaker Foley, June 21, 1990, p. 15229). See
    Deschler, ch. 21, Sec. 26.11; see generally Deschler, ch. 23, Sec. 25.

      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).

    [[Page 653]]

    minority member of the Rules Committee regarding
    this practice, see January 24, 1996, pp. 1228, 1229.
      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 special rules, see House
    Practice, ch. 51, Sec. 11. For an exchange of correspondence between the
    chair and ranking

      A special order of business reported by the Committee on Rules
    directing the Clerk to refrain from certifying an enrollment pending the
    resolution of a given contingency does not violate clause 2(d)(2) (Apr.
    13, 2011, p. _).

    Sec. 860. 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,
    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 (sec. 426(a); 2 U.S.C. 658e(a)). See Sec. 1127, infra.

      Clause 9 of rule XXI establishes a point of order against
    considerationof certain measures for failure to disclose (or disclaim
    the presence of)certain earmarks, tax benefits, and tariff benefits
    (paragraphs (a) and (b)),and permits a vote on the question of
    consideration of a rule or orderwaiving such points of order (paragraph
    (c)). See Sec. 1068d, infra.

    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 intention to do so. The Speaker shall
    recognize a member of the committee who rises for that purpose.

    [[Page 654]]

    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.

      (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

      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). A gender-based
    reference was eliminated in the 111th Congress (sec. 2(l), H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 6, 2009, p. _). 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 655]]

      This provision was contained in section 109 of the Legislative
    Reorganization Act of 1970 (84 Stat. 1140) and became part of the rules
    in the 92d Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 22, 1971, p. 144). Before the House
    recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this provision was found in
    former clause 2(l)(7) of rule XI (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). In
    modern practice, this subparagraph is normally inapplicable in light of
    clause 2(b) of rule XVIII, which provides for the House resolving into
    the Committee of the Whole by declaration of the Speaker pursuant to a
    special order of business rather than by adoption of a motion.

    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), although
    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 656]]

    with the public
    interest'' (II, 1547; III, 1896-1901; V, 5759; VI, 436). But in some
    instances the House has made its inquiries of the President without
    condition, and has even made the inquiry imperative (III, 1896-1901).
    Resolutions of inquiry are delivered under direction of the Clerk (III,
    1879) and are answered by subordinate officers of the Government either
    directly or through the President (III, 1908-1910).

    Sec. 865. Forms of resolutions of inquiry and
    delivery thereof.

      Resolutions of  inquiry are usually simple rather than concurrent in
    form (III, 1875), and are never joint resolutions (III, 1860). A
    resolution authorizing a committee to request information has been
    treated as a resolution of inquiry (III, 1860). It has been considered
    proper to use the word ``request'' in asking for information from the
    President and ``direct'' in addressing the heads of departments (III,
    1856, footnote, 1895). It is usual for the House in calling on the
    President for information, especially with relation to foreign affairs,
    to use the qualifying clause ``if not incompatible

    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 657]]

    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 a prescribed timeframe (formerly one week, now 14
    legislative days) (VIII, 3368; Speaker Rayburn, Feb. 9, 1950, p. 1755)
    exclusive of the day of introduction and the day of discharge (III,
    1858, 1859). If a committee refuses or neglects to report the resolution
    back, the House may reach the resolution only by a motion to discharge
    the committee (III, 1865). The ordinary motion to discharge a committee
    is not privileged (VIII, 2316); but the practice of the House has given
    privilege to the motion in cases of resolutions of inquiry (III, 1866-
    1870). And this motion to discharge is privileged at the end of the time
    period, though the resolution may have been delayed in reaching the
    committee (III, 1871). The motion to discharge is not debatable (III,
    1868; VI, 415). However,

    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.

      Fifth. Disposal of business on the Speaker's table as provided in
    clause 2.

    [[Page 658]]

      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, pp. 7588, 7600).

    [[Page 659]]

    ruption (IV, 3070, 3071) unless the
    House adjourns. After an adjournment, the House starts anew with the
    prayer. Although 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 because 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 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 inter

      (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 660]]

    bers 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
    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
    Mem

    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
    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, because
    it merely permits consideration of a matter not otherwise privileged
    (Dec. 16, 1987, p. 35816).

    Sec. 873. Disposal of
    business on the Speaker's table.

      2. Business on the Speaker's table  shall be disposed of as follows:

    [[Page 661]]

          (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.

      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).

    [[Page 662]]

    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
    the Speaker (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).

    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 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,

    [[Page 663]]

    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;
    the Speaker 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 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

    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). Although 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).

    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 all other
    unfinished business shall be resumed whenever the class of business to
    which it belongs shall be in order under the rules.

    [[Page 664]]

    satisfactory, 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).
      The first rule relating to unfinished business was adopted in 1794.
    Changes were made in 1860 and 1880, but the rule finally became
    un

    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). If 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 665]]

    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 motions 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). A bill coming over from a preceding day with
    the previous question ordered

    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 666]]

    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 committees
    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

      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).

    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
    a duty to decide the question (IV, 3127) but may base the decision on
    statements from the chair and other members of the committee (IV, 3128).

    [[Page 667]]

    mittee 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.

    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 Com

      This portion of the rule was adopted in 1890 as part of the plan for
    enabling the House at will to go at any time to any public bill on its
    calendars (IV, 3134). Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th
    Congress, this provision was found in former clause 5 of rule XXIV (H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

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

    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 the Member
    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).

    [[Page 668]]

    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).

     end segment .009 segment .010 -- rule XV through rule XVII

      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,

                                     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 669]]

      This provision (formerly clause 1 of rule XXVII) developed from a rule
    adopted in 1794, which provided that no rule should be rescinded without
    one day's notice. In 1822 a paragraph was added that no rule should be
    suspended except by a two-thirds vote. In 1828 it was amended to provide
    that the order of business, as established by the rules, should not be
    changed except by a two-thirds vote. Originally contemplating motions to
    suspend the rules on any day, the rule was amended in 1847 to restrict
    the motion to Mondays of each week, and, in 1880, to the first and third
    Mondays of each month. In 1874 the old limit of 10 days at the end of
    the session was reduced to six days. In the 93d Congress, the rule was
    amended to permit motions to suspend the rules on the first and third
    Mondays and on the Tuesdays immediately following those days and to
    eliminate the distinction between days on which committees and
    individuals had preference (H. Res. 6, Jan. 3, 1973, pp. 26, 27). In the
    95th Congress, the rule was amended to permit such motions on every
    Monday and Tuesday (H. Res. 5, Jan. 4, 1977, 95th Cong., pp. 53-70).
    During the first session of the 108th Congress, the House authorized the
    Speaker to entertain motions that the House suspend the rules on
    Wednesdays through the second Wednesday in April as though under this
    clause (sec. 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. 16275). In the 109th Congress, the House
    amended the rule to permit motions to suspend the rules every Wednesday
    (sec. 2(e), H. Res. 5, Jan. 4, 2005, p. 43). 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).

    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 2(b) of rule IV; V,
    7270), or the introduction of persons in the galleries (clause 7 of rule
    XVII; VI, 197).

      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 (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).

    [[Page 670]]

    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).
      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.
    1895) including to the sponsor (July 30, 2010, p. _). However, if a
    special rule requires that

    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. 7807). 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.

      Some older precedents indicate that the right of a Member to have read
    the paper on which the Member 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. The Clerk reports the title of the bill and a
    motion that the measure be read in full is not in order (July 30, 2010,
    p. _). 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.

    [[Page 671]]

    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, if 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; Nov. 2, 2009,
    p. _), and no appeal may be taken from the Speaker's denial of
    recognition (II, 1425).

    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).

    [[Page 672]]

      Before the 93d Congress, the rule gave to individuals preference on
    the first Monday of the month for making motions to suspend the rules,
    and preference on the third Mondays for committees to make the motion
    (V, 6790). If on a committee day an individual motion was made and
    seconded, it was then too late to make a point of order (V, 6809). In
    rare instances, under earlier House practice, the Speaker called the
    committees in regular order for motions to suspend the rules, but this
    method was not required (V, 6810, 6811). The earlier practice also
    required a motion to be formally and specifically authorized by a
    committee (V, 6805-6807), 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. 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).

    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.

    [[Page 673]]

    adjourn has been acted on, a quorum has failed,
    another motion to adjourn has been admitted (V, 5744-5746).

      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. 19
    (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

    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, pp.
    20850-52, 20862). 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 674]]

    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. It was added in the 93d Congress (H. Res. 998, Apr.
    9, 1974, pp. 10195-99), amended in the 95th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 4,
    1977, pp. 53-70), and amended further in the 96th Congress (H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 15, 1979, pp. 7-16). It was deleted entirely in the 97th Congress
    (H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 1981, pp. 98-113) when all of the Speaker's
    postponing authorities were consolidated into clause 5 of rule I
    (current clause 8 of rule XX).

    892. Motion to discharge a committee.

      2. (a)  Motions to
    discharge committees shall be in order on the second and fourth Mondays
    of a month.

      (b)(1) A Member may present to the Clerk a motion in writing to
    discharge--

          (A) a committee from consideration of a public bill or public
    resolution that has been referred to it for 30 legislative days; or

          (B) the Committee on Rules from consideration of a resolution that
    has been referred to it for seven legislative days and that proposes a
    special order of business for the consideration of a public bill or
    public resolution that has been reported by a standing committee or has
    been referred to a standing committee for 30 legislative days.

      (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 675]]

    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 signatories 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 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 the signatories a matter of

      (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.

    [[Page 676]]

    minutes, one-half in favor of the motion and one-half in
    opposition thereto.
      (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

      (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.

      (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.

    [[Page 677]]

      (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 678]]

    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. 19 (adopted Jan. 5, 2007)). The
    112th Congress clarified that paragraph (c) does not require the
    disclosure of actual signatures (sec. 2(f), H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 2011, p.
    _).
      In the 103d Congress, after a successful petition under this clause
    placed on the calendar a motion to discharge the Committee on Rules from
    further consideration of a resolution to require publication of the
    names of Members who had signed pending discharge petitions, the clause
    was so amended (H. Res. 134, Sept. 28, 1993, p. 22698). In the 104th
    Congress the clause was amended to ensure the periodic publication of
    such names (sec. 219, H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 468). Before the 103d
    Congress signatures on

      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. 23853). The rule does not authorize
    signature of discharge motions by proxy (VII, 1014). When a Member
    withdraws a 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).

      The death or resignation of a Member who has signed a motion does not
    invalidate the signature (May 31, 1934, p. 10159). It may be withdrawn
    by the Member's 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 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).

    [[Page 679]]

    being discharged, if opposed to the motion, has been
    recognized to control the 10 minutes in opposition (Aug. 10, 1970, p.
    27999).
      The right to close debate on a motion to discharge a committee is
    reserved to the proponent of the motion (VII, 1010a); and the chair of
    the committee

      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.

    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).

    [[Page 680]]

    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.

    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

      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. 19). 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 681]]

    Private Calendar, first and third Tuesdays
      On District days it is in order to go into the Committee of the Whole
    to consider revenue or general appropriation bills (VI, 716-718; VII,
    876, 1123). Consideration of conference reports is in order on District
    Monday (VIII, 3202). District of Columbia business is in order on the
    second and fourth Mondays of the month before or after other business
    (such as motions to suspend the rules), and the fact that the House has
    considered some District of Columbia business before motions to suspend
    the rules does not affect the eligibility of further such business after
    suspensions have been completed (Sept. 17, 1984, p. 25523).

    895. Interruption of the regular order on Tuesdays for
    consideration of the Private Calendar.

      5. (a)  On the first Tuesday of a
    month, the Speaker shall direct the Clerk to call the bills and
    resolutions on the Private Calendar after disposal of such business on
    the Speaker's table as requires reference only. If two or more Members,
    Delegates, or the Resident Commissioner object to the consideration of a
    bill or resolution so called, it shall be recommitted to the committee
    that reported it. No other business shall be in order before completion
    of the call of the Private Calendar on this day unless two-thirds of the
    Members voting, a quorum being present, agree to a motion that the House
    dispense with the call.

    [[Page 682]]

      (b)(1) On the third Tuesday of a month, after the disposal of such
    business on the Speaker's table as requires reference only, the Speaker
    may direct the Clerk to call the bills and resolutions on the Private
    Calendar. Preference shall be given to omnibus bills containing the
    texts of bills or resolutions that have previously been objected to on a
    call of the Private Calendar. If two or more Members, Delegates, or the
    Resident Commissioner object to the consideration of a bill or
    resolution so called (other than an omnibus bill), it shall be
    recommitted to the committee that reported it. Two-thirds of the Members
    voting, a quorum being present, may adopt a motion that the House
    dispense with the call on this day.

      (2) Omnibus bills shall be read for amendment by paragraph. No
    amendment shall be in order except to strike or to reduce amounts of
    money or to provide limitations. An item or matter stricken from an
    omnibus bill may not thereafter during the same session of Congress be
    included in an omnibus bill. Upon passage such an omnibus bill shall be
    resolved into the several bills and resolutions of which it is composed.
    The several bills and resolutions, with any amendments adopted by the
    House, shall be engrossed, when necessary, and otherwise considered as
    passed severally by the House as distinct bills and resolutions.

      (c) The Speaker may not entertain a reservation of the right to object
    to the consideration of a bill or resolution under this clause. A bill
    or resolution considered under this clause shall be considered in the
    House as in the Committee of the Whole. A motion to dispense with the
    call of the Private Calendar under this clause shall be privileged.
    Debate on such a motion shall be limited to five minutes in support and
    five minutes in opposition.

    [[Page 683]]

    1997, p. 11015; Nov. 17,
    2003, p. 29279). 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 has discretion to recognize a Member to
    move a call of the House before the call of the Private Calendar (July
    8, 1987, p. 18972).

    Sec. 896. Tuesday as a day for private
    business.

      This  provision (formerly clause 6 of rule XXIV) was adopted in
    the 62d Congress in lieu of special orders under which pension and
    private business formerly had been considered. The rule was amended on
    April 23, 1932 (VII, 846) and was adopted in its present form on March
    27, 1935 (pp. 4480-89, 4538). When the House recodified its rules in the
    106th Congress, this provision was transferred from former clause 6 of
    rule XXIV and the archaic reference to the ``Calendar of the Committee
    of the Whole House'' was changed to the ``Private Calendar'' (H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). A Member serving as an ``official objector'' for
    the Private Calendar has periodically included in the Record an
    explanation of how bills on the Private Calendar are considered (see,
    e.g., Dec. 5, 1995, p. 35354; June 17,

    Sec. 897. Methods of considering omnibus
    bills.

      During the  consideration of omnibus bills the Chair declines to recognize
    Members for unanimous-consent requests to address the House (May 7,
    1935, p. 7100); motions to strike 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 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 in those cases,
    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
    (provided that the Chair has not exercised discretionary authority (Nov.
    17, 1981, p. 27770 (sustained by tabling of appeal)) to dispense with
    the call).

    Sec. 898. Former Corrections Calendar.

      For the  former
    Corrections Calendar rule, see Sec. 898 of the House Rules and Manual
    for the 111th Congress (H. Doc. 110-162).

    Calendar Call of Committees, Wednesdays

    Sec. 899. Former Consent Calendar.

      For the  former Consent
    Calendar rule, see Sec. 899 of the House Rules and Manual for the 111th
    Congress (H. Doc. 110-162).

    [[Page 684]]

    (except as provided by clause 4 of rule XIV)
    whose chair, or other member authorized by the committee, has announced
    to the House a request for such call on the preceding legislative day.

    900. Calendar Wednesday business.

      6. (a)  On Wednesday of
    each week, business shall not be in order before completion of the call
    of those committees

      (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) This clause does not apply during the last two weeks of a session
    of Congress.

      This clause (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) was adopted January 18,
    1916. The clause was rewritten in the 111th Congress to provide for
    Calendar Wednesday business from a committee only upon its request (sec.
    2(e), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, p. _). For a history of the clause as it
    existed before that Congress, and related precedents, see Sec. Sec. 900,
    901 of the House Rules and Manual for the One Hundred Tenth Congress (H.
    Doc. 109-157).

    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). The rule does not apply to amendments between
    the Houses, unreported bills, or Senate bills being held at the
    Speaker's desk (Mar. 12, 2008, p. _). House Calendar bills have no
    preference over Union Calendar bills (VII, 938).

    [[Page 685]]

    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).
      When a bill on the Union Calendar is called up on Calendar Wednesday
    the House automatically resolves itself into the Committee of the Whole

      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).

      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) when committees
    are called twice (VII, 924; Mar. 12, 2008, p. _).

      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 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,
    because such a question is privileged under the Constitution (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) (Mar. 28, 1984, p. 6869) and for
    one-minute speeches (Mar. 21, 1984, pp. 6187, 6188; May 7, 2008, p. _)
    before the call of committees on Calendar Wednesday. District of
    Columbia business is eligible for consideration on Calendar Wednesday
    (VII, 937). A motion to adjourn (May 7, 2008, p. _) and the
    administration of the oath (May 7, 2008, p. _; VI, 22) may interrupt the
    call of committees. Once Calendar Wednesday proceedings are completed,
    other business may be conducted (VII, 921).

      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 may be claimed by a Member who is in favor of the bill
    (VII, 962), but this principle has been questioned (VII, 961).

    [[Page 686]]

    measures approved by the committee and to take such
    necessary steps to bring the matter to a vote, is sufficient authority
    for the chair to call up a properly-noticed bill on Calendar Wednesday,
    but any other committee member must obtain specific authority of the
    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. 9201). 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 its chair by a committee (IV, 3127).

      Clause 2(b) of rule XIII (formerly clause 2(l)(1) of rule XI),
    requiring the chair of each committee to report or cause to be reported
    promptly

                                    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 687]]

    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 demand that a motion, including the motion to adjourn, be
    reduced to writing and in the proper form (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 chair of the
    Committee of the

    Withdrawal

    Sec. 903. Dilatory motions.

      The  Speaker has declined to
    entertain debate or appeal on a question as to the dilatoriness of a
    motion, because doing so would 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 a 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.

    904. Stating and withdrawing of motions.

      2.  When a motion
    is entertained, the Speaker shall state it or cause it to be read aloud
    by the Clerk before it is debated. The motion then shall be in the
    possession of the House but may be withdrawn at any time before a
    decision or amendment thereon.

    [[Page 688]]

      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, 4937, 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 proponent 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, in which 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) including after proceedings have been postponed under clause 8
    of rule XX (Sept. 29, 2010, p. _).

    [[Page 689]]

      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; Nov. 7, 2007, p. _). An
    amendment disposed of in the Committee of the Whole by voice vote may
    not be withdrawn (June 17, 2004, pp. 12944, 12945).

      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).

      If 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 (V, 5349; Feb. 26, 1985, p. 3501) or if a
    voice vote (and the record vote on the associated motion for the
    previous question) has been vacated (Sept. 25, 2008, p. _), the
    resolution may be withdrawn. 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 against a voice vote thereon (pursuant to
    former clause 5 of rule I (current clause 8 of rule XX)), the manager
    may withdraw such 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 690]]

    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 in which 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 691]]

    a bill the consideration of which has been provided by a
    special order of business (IV, 3175; V, 4953-4957; June 22, 2006, p.
    12280; Jan. 24, 2007, p. 2140; Jan. 31, 2007, p. 2736), 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 a 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. 12191).

    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 692]]

    Sec. 910. Unfunded mandates; congressional earmarks;
    paygo.

      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.

      Clause 9 of 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
    (paragraphs (a) and (b)), and permits a vote on the question of
    consideration of a rule or order waiving such points of order (paragraph
    (c)). Certain cognizability thresholds are established for points of
    order under the rule (paragraph (d)). See Sec. 1068d, infra.

      Both points of order may be raised against the same special order of
    business (May 14, 2008, p. _).

      Former clause 10(c)(3) of rule XXI required the Chair to put the
    question of consideration with regard to measures that included an
    emergency designation for pay-as-you-go principles. See Sec. 1068j,
    infra.

    Sec. 4. Paygo Estimates and Paygo Scorecards.

      The Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010 (tit. I, P.L. 111-139)
    requires the Chair to put the question of consideration with regard to
    measures that include a pay-as-you-go emergency designation:

                                      * * *

      (g) Emergency Legislation.--

              (1) Designation in Statute.--If a provision of direct spending

            or revenue legislation in a PAYGO Act is enacted as an emergency

            requirement that the Congress so designates in statute pursuant

            to this section, the amounts of new budget authority, outlays,

            and revenue in all fiscal years resulting from that provision

            shall be treated as an emergency requirement for the purposes of

            this Act.

              (2) Designation in the House of Representatives.--If a PAYGO

            Act includes a provision expressly designated as an emergency

            for the purposes of this title, the Chair shall put the question

            of consideration with respect thereto.

    [[Page 693]]

    Precedence of motions
      The question of consideration applies to an emergency designation
    contained in an amendment between the Houses (in addition to a bill or
    joint resolution) (e.g., May 28, 2010, p. _; July 22, 2010, p. _) but
    not to a measure considered under suspension of the rules (e.g., Feb.
    25, 2010, p. _). Failure of the Chair to put the question of
    consideration of a measure under this provision may be overtaken by
    subsequent action of the House on the measure (July 1, 2010, p. _).
    Where a measure contained an emergency designation under section 4(g)(1)
    of the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010 and an emergency designation
    for purposes of pay-as-you-go principles under former clause 10(c) of
    rule XXI, the Chair put a single question of consideration with respect
    thereto pending consideration of the measure (e.g., May 28, 2010, p. _).

    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 the
    discretion of the Speaker, to entertain a motion--

          (A) that the Speaker be authorized to declare a recess; or

          (B) that when the House adjourns it stand adjourned to a day and
    time certain.

      (2) Either motion shall be of equal privilege with the motion to
    adjourn and shall be decided without debate.

    [[Page 694]]

    p. 39). A gender-based reference was eliminated in the
    111th Congress (sec. 2(l), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, p. _). 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 first form of this clause appeared in 1789, but amendments have
    been made at various times (V, 5301; VIII, 2757). Paragraph (c) (former
    final two sentences of the clause) was 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,

      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 695]]

    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. 4969). A Member's
    mere revelation that the Member seeks to offer a motion to adjourn does
    not suffice to make that motion ``pending,'' and thus the Chair remains
    able to declare a recess under clause 12(a) of rule I (Oct. 28, 1997, p.
    23524; June 25, 2003, p. 16241; July 13, 2009, 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); (5) when
    the Speaker is absent and the Clerk is presiding (I, 228). The motion to
    adjourn may not interrupt a Member who has the floor (V, 5369, 5370;
    VIII, 2646; Mar. 25, 1993, p. 6373; Oct. 1, 1997, p. 20902) including,
    for example, by virtue of unanimous-consent permission to announce to
    the House the legislative program (Dec. 14, 1982, p. 30549). It may not:
    (1) interrupt a call of the yeas and nays (V, 6053) or the actual act of
    voting by other means (V, 5360); (2) be made after the House has voted
    to go into Committee of the Whole (IV, 4728; V, 5367, 5368); (3) defer
    the right of a Member to take the oath (I, 622); (4) be repeated in the
    absence of intervening business (Speaker Albert, July 31, 1975, p.
    26243). When no question is under debate

      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 696]]

    cretion 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 because 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 (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
    dis

      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).

    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 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. 12299), a motion to discharge a committee from a resolution
    of inquiry (VI, 415), a proposal to investigate with a view to
    impeachment (VI, 541), a concurrent resolution to adjourn sine die (Mar.
    27, 1936, p. 4512), and a resolution to expel a Member (Oct. 1, 1976, p.
    35111). But a question of privilege (affecting the right of a Member to
    a seat) that has been laid on the table may be taken therefrom on motion
    made and agreed to by the House (V, 5438). The motion to lay on the
    table has the precedence given it by the rule, but may not be made after
    the previous question is ordered (V, 5415-5422; VIII, 2655), or even
    after the yeas and nays have been ordered on the demand for the previous
    question (V, 5408, 5409); but pending the demand for the previous
    question on a motion that is under debate, the motion to lay the primary
    motion on the table is preferential and is voted on first (Speaker
    Albert, Sept. 22, 1976, pp. 31876-82; Speaker O'Neill, July 10, 1985,
    pp. 18397-18400). The previous question having been ordered on a bill to
    final passage, the motion to lay the bill on the table may not then be
    offered pending a motion to reconsider the vote whereby the bill had
    been passed or rejected (Sept. 20, 1979, p. 25512).

    [[Page 697]]

    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).
      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

      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: (1) a motion to
    suspend the rules (V, 5405); (2) a motion to commit after the previous
    question is ordered (V, 5412-5414; VIII, 2653, 2655); (3) any motion
    relating to the order of business (V, 5403, 5404). It may not be applied
    to a motion to discharge a committee under former clause 3 of rule XXVII
    (current clause 2 of rule XV) (June 11, 1945, p. 5892) but may be
    applied to the motion to discharge a committee from consideration of a
    resolution of inquiry (V, 5407).

      The motion to lay on the table is applicable to debatable secondary or
    privileged motions for disposal of another matter; thus a motion to
    refer (V, 5433; Aug. 13, 1982, pp. 20969, 20975-78) or a motion to
    recede and concur in a Senate amendment in disagreement may be laid on
    the table (Speaker O'Neill, Feb. 22, 1978, p. 4072) without carrying the
    pending matter to the table. The motion is not applicable to a
    conference report (V, 6540).

    [[Page 698]]

    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). If 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 move 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). The House has postponed, along with the
    underlying matter, an appeal from a decision of the Chair thereon (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 699]]

      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 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).

    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 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 if
    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). Where a motion
    for the previous question on a resolution has preempted a pending motion
    to refer such resolution, the motion to refer remains pending and
    debatable under the hour rule upon rejection of the motion for the
    previous question (Apr. 22, 2010, p. _). A motion to refer takes
    precedence over a 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 700]]

    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
    Member (who need not qualify as being in opposition to the pending
    question)

    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 701]]

      (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 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 702]]

    question if, for example, the resolution
    grammatically and substantively relates to different fiscal years (May
    7, 1980, pp. 10185-87), or includes a separate, hortatory section having
    its own grammatical and substantive meaning (Speaker Foley, Mar. 5,
    1992, p. 4657).

    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), because 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 because 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, because 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

      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 resolving clauses separately certifying the
    contemptuous conduct of two individuals is divisible (Feb. 27, 1986, p.
    3040); as is a resolution with one resolving 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; June 19, 2009, p. _; Mar. 11,
    2010, p. _).

      Except on resolutions to elect Members to committees or on resolutions
    reported from the Committee on Rules providing a special order of
    business, where division of the question is prohibited by this clause, a
    resolution reported from the Committee on Rules may be divided if
    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 703]]

    division may be demanded on an amendment to
    strike various unrelated phrases (VIII, 3166; Mar. 28, 1984, p. 6898).
    An amendment proposing to change a figure in one paragraph of an
    appropriation bill and also to insert a new (``fetch-back'') paragraph
    at another point in the bill is divisible (July 15, 1993, p. 15843).
    Absent a contrary order, the question may be divided on 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

      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 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, because 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).

    [[Page 704]]

      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 and insert (Oct. 15,
    1986, p. 32135). Each Senate amendment must be voted on as a whole
    (VIII, 3175) but the Committee of the Whole having reported a Senate
    amendment with the recommendation that it be agreed to with an
    amendment, a separate vote was had on the amendment to the Senate
    amendment (VIII, 2420). When Senate amendments to a House bill are
    considered in the House, a separate vote may be had on each amendment
    (VIII, 2383, 2400, 3191), and separate votes may be had on nongermane
    portions of Senate amendments as provided in clause 10 of rule
    XXII.

      It is not in order to divide a motion to lay several connected
    propositions on the table (V, 6138-6140). Similarly, it is not in order
    to divide a motion for the previous question on two related
    propositions, as on a special 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).

      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; May 28,
    2010, p. _). 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 conference report is considered as a whole (Oct. 8, 2009, p.
    _).

      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 705]]

    a division is
    demanded (Oct. 21, 1981, pp. 24785-89). If the question on adopting an
    amendment is divided by special rule (rather than on demand from the
    floor), the Chair puts the question on each divided portion of the
    amendment in the order in which it appears (May 23, 1996, p. 12316).
      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). If 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). If 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, if 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). If 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

    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 706]]

    of the Whole is postponed under authority of
    a special order of the House (such authority now found in clause 6(g) of
    rule XVIII), the amendment becomes unfinished business and is no longer
    pending, thereby permitting the offering of another amendment (May 10,
    2000, p. 7513). An amendment in the third degree is not specified by the
    rule and is not permissible (V, 5754; VIII, 2580, 2888, 2891), even when
    the third degree is in the nature of a substitute for an amendment to a
    substitute (V, 5791; VIII, 2889).

    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

      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. 10631; Sept. 14, 2004, p. 18429).

      A Member may not amend or modify his or her own amendment except by
    unanimous consent (Oct. 1, 1985, p. 25453); and if 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 707]]

    substitute must be germane to the pending
    amendment (VIII, 2879, 2880; Deschler, ch. 27, Sec. 18.6). A substitute
    may result in similar language to the original text proposed to be
    changed by the pending amendment, but may not result in identical
    language (Deschler, ch. 27, Sec. 18.15). To an amendment adding a new
    section, an amendment making perfecting changes in the bill rather than
    in the amendment is not a proper perfecting amendment, but may, if
    germane, be offered as a substitute for the amendment (Deschler, ch. 27,
    Sec. 18.7). The Chair will not look behind the form of the amendment in
    determining whether it is 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 all
    after its first word and inserting a new text (V, 5793, 5794). Although
    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

      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 in which 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 708]]

    ler, ch. 27,
    Sec. 5.34). An amendment in the nature of a substitute having been
    agreed to, the vote is then taken on the original proposition as amended
    (II, 983; V, 5799, 5800), and no further amendment is in order (Speaker
    O'Neill, Mar. 26, 1985, p. 6274). If a perfecting amendment to an
    amendment in the nature of a substitute, striking 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
    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 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). If 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 Desch

    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 or her feet
    seeking recognition for that purpose at the time the amendment was
    offered (July 28, 1995, p. 20897; May 25, 2006, p. 9823). 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, if the Member making the point of order is on his or
    her 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; July 9, 2009, p. _), 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.

      Although  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 709]]

    nized 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 the
    enacting clause has precedence of the motion to amend, and may be
    offered while an amendment is pending (V, 5328-5331; VIII, 2622-2624);
    but the motion to amend takes precedence over a motion that the
    Committee of the Whole rise and report the bill with the recommendation
    that it pass (July 27, 1937, p. 7699).

    Sec. 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 chair of the
    committee reporting a bill should be recog

    Sec. 927. Relation of the motion to amend to other
    motions.

      With  some exceptions an amendment may attach itself to secondary
    or 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 710]]

    amendment (V, 5825).
    The rule that amendments should be germane applies to amendments
    reported by committees (V, 5806), but a resolution providing for
    consideration of the bill with committee amendments may waive points of
    order (Oct. 10, 1967, p. 28406), and the point of order under this rule
    does not apply to a special order reported from the Committee on Rules
    ``self-executing'' the adoption in the House of a nongermane amendment
    to a bill, because 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 if 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). The Chair
    will not render an advisory opinion on whether a pending amendment is
    germane, there being no occasion for a ruling (Apr. 6, 2011, p. _).
      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 words
    already in a bill may not be ruled out as not germane (V, 5805; VIII,
    2918) unless such action would expand the scope and meaning of the text
    (VIII, 2917-2921; Mar. 23, 1960, p. 6381); and a pro forma amendment
    ``to strike the last word'' has been considered germane (July 28, 1965,
    p. 18639). Although 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

    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). A special order of business directing that certain matter be
    added to the engrossment of a bill does not operate until passage of
    that bill (Mar. 5, 2008, p. _).

    [[Page 711]]

    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,
    because affecting budget authority for a different agency not the
    subject of the pending paragraph (July 17, 1985, p. 19436). Similarly,
    an amendment to a general appropriation bill in the form of a limitation
    on funds therein but extending to activities prescribed by laws
    unrelated to the functions of departments and agencies addressed by the
    bill is not germane (July 10, 2000, p. 13605).
      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

      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 if 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). If 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). Although 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).

    [[Page 712]]

    duties and
    responsibilities of Federal officials (Oct. 12, 1978, pp. 36459-61).
      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

      The test of germaneness of an amendment to or a substitute for an
    amendment in the nature of a substitute is its relationship to the
    substitute and not its relationship to the bill to which the amendment
    in the nature of a substitute has been offered (July 19, 1973, p. 24958;
    July 22, 1975, p. 23990; June 1, 1976, pp. 16051-56; July 28, 1982, pp.
    18355-58, 18361), and an amendment to a substitute is not required to
    affect the same page and line numbers as the substitute in order to be
    germane, it being sufficient that the amendment is germane to the
    subject matter of the substitute (Aug. 1, 1979, pp. 21944-47). When an
    amendment in the nature of a substitute is offered at the end of the
    first section of a bill, the test of germaneness is the relationship
    between the amendment and the entire bill, and the germaneness of an
    amendment in the nature of a substitute for a bill is not necessarily
    determined by an incidental portion of the amendment 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 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). If a perfecting amendment to the text is
    offered pending a vote on a motion to strike 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).

    [[Page 713]]

    committee with
    instructions must be germane to the subject matter of the bill (see V,
    6888; VIII, 2711).

    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, because 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 if 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

      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 714]]

    circumstances being that the
    motion as a whole be germane to the Senate amendment as a whole under
    clause 7 of rule XVI (Oct. 4, 1978, pp. 33502-06; June 30, 1987, p.
    18294).

    Sec. 931. Senate amendments and matter contained in
    conference reports.

      In  the consideration of Senate amendments to a House
    bill an amendment must be germane to the particular Senate amendment to
    which it is offered (V, 6188-6191; VIII, 2936; May 14, 1963, p. 8506;
    Dec. 13, 1980, p. 34097), and it is not sufficient that an amendment to
    a Senate amendment is germane to the original House bill if it is not
    germane to the subject matter of a Senate amendment that merely inserts
    new matter and does not strike House provisions (V, 6188; VIII, 2936).
    But if a Senate amendment proposes to strike 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

    [[Page 715]]

    duct of
    industrial cooperation projects of U.S. nationals in that country, an
    amendment waiving provisions of other law by requiring changes in tariff
    schedules to achieve overall trade reciprocity between that country and
    the United States (Nov. 6, 1997, p. 24824); to a resolution authorizing
    the deployment of troops to implement a peace agreement, an amendment
    expressing support for the armed forces in carrying out such mission
    (Mar. 11, 1999, p. 4301); to a bill addressing 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, a motion to recommit with instructions 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, pp. 18860 0962
    (sustained by tabling of appeal)) or (2) improvements in enforcement and
    judicial proceedings (Sept. 21, 2006, p. 18876 0978), 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, pp.
    13224, 13225); to a bill settling land claims of two tribal communities
    in a state, a motion to recommit with instructions broaching fuel
    procurement by federal agencies (June 25, 2008, p. _ (sustained by
    tabling of appeal)); to a bill addressing economic stabilization and
    assistance funds and housing matters, a motion to recommit with
    instructions addressing the solvency of various Social Security trust
    funds (Jan. 21, 2009, p. _ (sustained by tabling of appeal)); to a bill
    addressing small business investment programs, a motion to recommit with
    instructions expressing the sense of the House on the consideration of
    appropriation bills (July 8, 2009, p. _ (sustained by tabling of
    appeal)); to a bill addressing water recycling projects in one
    geographic area, a motion to recommit with instructions addressing water
    availability under a project in a different geographic area (Oct. 15,
    2009, p. _ (sustained by tabling of appeal)); to a bill confined to one
    mortgage refinancing program, an amendment (1) adding findings regarding
    mortgages more broadly (Mar. 10, 2011, p. _), (2) establishing a new
    mortgage refinancing program (Mar. 10, 2011, p. _), (3) requiring a
    study of mortgages more broadly (Mar. 10, 2011, p. _), (4) addressing
    foreclosure generally (Mar. 10, 2011, p. _), and (5) addressing
    compensation within the financial services industry (Mar. 10, 2011, p.
    _); to a joint resolution disapproving a Federal Communications
    Commission regulation, a motion to recommit with instructions further
    continuing appropriations for the current fiscal year (Apr. 8, 2011, p.
    _ (sustained by tabling of appeal)).

    Sec. 932. Subject matter as test of
    germaneness.

      An  amendment must relate to the subject matter under
    consideration. Thus, the following are not germane: to a bill seeking to
    eliminate wage discrimination based on the sex of the employee, an
    amendment to make the provisions of the bill applicable to
    discrimination based on race (July 25, 1962, p. 14778); to a bill
    establishing an office in the Department of the Interior to manage
    biological information, an amendment addressing socioeconomic matters
    (Oct. 26, 1993, p. 26082); to a bill authorizing military assistance to
    Israel and funds for the United Nations emergency force in the Middle
    East, an amendment expressing the sense of Congress that the President
    conduct negotiations to obtain a peace treaty in the Middle East and the
    resumption of diplomatic and trade relations between Arab nations and
    the United States and Israel (Dec. 11, 1973, p. 40842); to a concurrent
    resolution expressing congressional concern over certain domestic
    policies of a foreign government and urging that government to improve
    those internal problems in order to enhance better relations with the
    United States, amendments expressing the necessity for United States
    diplomatic initiatives as a consequence of that foreign government's
    policies (July 12, 1978, pp. 20500-05); to a resolution amending several
    clauses 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. 21795); 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 con

    [[Page 716]]

    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).
      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

      A bill comprehensively addressing a subject requires careful analysis
    to determine whether an amendment addresses a different subject. For
    example, to an amendment in the nature of a substitute comprehensively
    amending several sections of the Clean Air Act with respect to the
    impact of shortages of energy resources on standards imposed under that
    Act, an amendment to another section of the Act suspending temporarily
    the authority of the Administrator of the EPA to control automobile
    emissions was held germane (Dec. 14, 1973, p. 41688). On the other hand,
    to a bill comprehensively restructuring the production and distribution
    of food, an amendment proposed in a motion to recommit to provide
    nutrition assistance, including food stamps and soup kitchen programs,
    was held not germane (Feb. 29, 1996, p. 3257).

    [[Page 717]]

    ample, 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).

    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 ex

    [[Page 718]]

    levels for missile defense and
    readiness (Feb. 15, 1995, p. 5026); to a bill improving food safety
    through a myriad of methods including the tracing of food origins,
    recalls of food, and quarantine of food, a motion to recommit with
    instructions allowing the preemptive purchase of food related to
    activities in the bill (July 30, 2009, p. _).
      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 proposition to accomplish the broad
    purpose of settling land claims of Alaska natives by a method general in
    scope, an amendment accomplishing the same purpose by a method more
    detailed in its provisions (Oct. 20, 1971, p. 37079); to an amendment
    comprehensively amending the Natural Gas Act to deregulate interstate
    sales of new natural gas and regulate aspects of intrastate gas use, a
    substitute providing regulatory authority for interstate and intrastate
    gas sales of large producers (Feb. 4, 1976, p. 2387); to a bill
    providing a temporary extension of existing authority, an amendment
    achieving the same purpose by providing a nominally permanent authority
    was held germane where both the bill and the amendment were based on
    reported economic projections under which either would achieve the same,
    necessarily temporary result by method of direct or indirect amendment
    to the same existing law (May 13, 1987, p. 12344); to a bill subjecting
    employers who fail to apprise their workers of health risks to penalties
    under other laws and regulations, a substitute subjecting such employers
    to penalties prescribed in the substitute itself (Oct. 14, 1987, p.
    27885); to an amendment freezing the obligation of funds for fiscal year
    1996 for missile defense until the Secretary of Defense rendered a
    specified readiness certification, an amendment permitting an increase
    in the obligation of such funds on the basis of legislative findings
    concerning readiness, because each proposition addressed the
    relationship between 1996 funding

    [[Page 719]]

    ment 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 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 creating new Federal laws to regulate intoxicating liquor
    (Aug. 3, 1999, p. 19216); to a bill addressing persons convicted of sex
    offenses against children with criminal punishment, an amendment
    addressing such perpetrators by treatment and rehabilitation (Mar. 14,
    2002, p. 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) (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
    amend

    [[Page 720]]

    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. 21795); 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 because including
    statements of policy within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Foreign
    Affairs (May 24, 1978, pp. 15293-95); to a bill reported from the
    Committee on Government Operations creating a new department,
    transferring the administration of existing laws to it, and authorizing
    appropriations to carry out the Act subject to provisions in existing
    law, an amendment prohibiting the use of funds so authorized to carry
    out a designated funding program transferred to the department, where
    the purpose of the authorization is to allow appropriations in general
    appropriation bills for the department to carry out its functions but
    where changes in the laws to be administered by the department remain
    within the jurisdiction of other committees of the House (June 19, 1979,
    p. 15570); to a bill reported by the Committee on Public Works
    authorizing funds for highway construction and mass transportation
    systems using motor vehicles, an amendment relating to urban mass
    transit (then within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Banking and
    Currency) and the railroad industry (then within the jurisdiction of the
    Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce) (Oct. 5, 1972, p. 34115);
    to a bill reported from the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs
    designating certain areas in a State as wilderness, an amendment
    providing unemployment benefits to workers displaced by the designation
    (Mar. 21, 1983, p. 6347); to a bill

    [[Page 721]]

    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, 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

    [[Page 722]]

    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 (June 22, 2006, p. 12298
    (sustained by tabling of appeal)), or vice versa (Jan. 10, 2007, p. 787
    (sustained by tabling of appeal)); to several individual bills on
    various topics within the jurisdiction of various other committees, an
    amendment addressing the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978,
    a matter within the jurisdiction of the Committee on the Judiciary and
    the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (July 12, 2007, pp.
    18843, 18844; Feb. 26, 2008, p. _; Feb. 27, 2008, p. _; Mar. 5, 2008, p.
    _; Mar. 6, 2008, p. _ (in each case sustained by tabling of appeal);
    Apr. 16, 2008, p. _ (sustained on appeal)); to a bill studying two
    rivers under the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, and issues related thereto,
    within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Natural Resources, a motion
    to recommit with instructions addressing comprehensive energy
    legislation touching several other committees' jurisdictions (Sept. 10,
    2008, p. _ (sustained by tabling of appeal)); to a bill confined to
    taxation issues within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Ways and
    Means, a motion to recommit with instructions addressing laws within the
    jurisdic

    [[Page 723]]

    tion of the Committees on Agriculture, Natural Resources,
    and Education and Labor (Sept. 26, 2008, p. _ (sustained by tabling of
    appeal)); to a bill addressing payments to physicians under the Medicare
    program and confined to the jurisdiction of the Committees on Energy and
    Commerce and Ways and Means, a motion to recommit with instructions
    addressing medical malpractice reform within the jurisdiction of the
    Committee on the Judiciary (Nov. 19, 2009, p. _ (sustained by tabling of
    appeal)); to a defense authorization bill addressing subjects in the
    jurisdiction of the Committee on Armed Services and several other
    committees, a motion to recommit with instructions broaching benefits of
    legislative branch employees within the jurisdiction of another
    committee (the Committee on House Administration) (May 28, 2010, p. _
    (sustained by tabling of appeal)); to a bill addressing various benefits
    in the jurisdiction of committees other than the Committee on
    Appropriations, an amendment proposed in a motion to recommit rescinding
    appropriations carried in a prior appropriation Act (July 1, 2010, p. _
    (sustained by tabling of appeal)); to a bill addressing a mortgage
    refinancing program within the jurisdiction of the Committee on
    Financial Services, an amendment modifying an income tax deduction
    within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Ways and Means (Mar. 10,
    2011, p. _).

    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

    [[Page 724]]

    the
    jurisdiction of the Committee on the Judiciary, is not germane (Oct. 4,
    2001, pp. 18797, 18809).
      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 because 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

      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 if 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).

      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 (May 23, 1978, pp. 15094-96; May 24, 1978, pp. 15293-
    95; Aug. 11, 1978, p. 25705).

      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 725]]

    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 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

    [[Page 726]]

    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.
    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

    [[Page 727]]

    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, 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, pp. 13539, 13540 (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, pp. 13540,
    13541 (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).

    [[Page 728]]

    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 continuing appropriations for the
    current fiscal year for a specified period, an amendment proposed in a
    motion to recommit making certain funds available beyond such time (Dec.
    13, 2007, p. _ (sustained by tabling of appeal)); 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,

    [[Page 729]]

    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); to
    a bill confined to a single national historic trail designation, a
    motion to recommit with instructions extending to all trails addressed
    by the National Trails System Act (July 10, 2008, p. _).

    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 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 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 (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).

    [[Page 730]]

    bility 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).
      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 the entire subsection of the bill,
    thereby eliminating the applica

      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). Although 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).

    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 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).

    [[Page 731]]

    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).
      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-

    [[Page 732]]

    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 if 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; Feb. 13, 2008, p. _
    (sustained by tabling of appeal)). 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, because limited to funds in the bill (Oct. 18,
    1979, p. 28763). Similarly, to a one-year authorization bill containing
    diverse limitations and directions to the agency in question during such
    year, an amendment further directing the agency to obtain information
    from the private sector, and to make such information public during such
    year, was held germane (Oct. 18, 1979, pp. 28815-17). Although an
    amendment making a permanent change in existing law has been held not
    germane to a bill proposing a temporary change in that law, if 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 re

    [[Page 733]]

    cipients 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). If 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 Committee on Agriculture to require the adoption of
    a minimum standard for the contents of ice cream was held germane,
    because 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 amend

    [[Page 734]]

    ment
    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 if a bill amends
    existing law in one narrow particular, an amendment proposing to modify
    such existing law in other particulars will generally be ruled out as
    not germane (Aug. 16, 1967, p. 22768; VIII, 2709, 2839, 3013, 3031; May
    12, 1976, p. 13532). To a bill narrowly amending an anti-discrimination
    provision in the Education Amendments of 1972 only to clarify the
    definition of a discriminating entity subject to 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

    [[Page 735]]

    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); 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

    [[Page 736]]

    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, 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

      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).

      Similarly, although 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 the availability of all funds in the
    bill until the former President has 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).

    [[Page 737]]

    2, 2007, pp. 11093 0995); 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).
      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

      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
    furnished 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 the
    official in the bill, an amendment further restricting such official's
    authority to construe under any circumstances certain other laws to be
    administered by that official (as an additional, although more
    restrictive, curtailment of existing authorities transferred by the
    bill) (June 11, 1979, pp. 14226-38).

    [[Page 738]]

    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).
      An amendment providing a privileged procedure for expedited review of
    an agency's regulations is not germane if 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

      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). Although 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).

      To a bill not only granting consent of Congress to an interstate
    compact but also imposing conditions on the granting of that consent, an
    amendment stating an additional related condition to that consent and
    not directly changing the compact may be germane (Oct. 7, 1997, p.
    21475). To a bill regulating immigration, an amendment providing that
    the operation of the act should not conflict with an agreement with
    Japan is not germane (VIII, 3050).

    [[Page 739]]

    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).

    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 on autos for 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, because 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 because
    the bill already comprehensively addressed those subject matters by
    disclaiming any purpose to amend

    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.

          (c) A third reading precedes passage when the Speaker states the
    question: ``Shall the bill [or joint resolution] be engrossed [when
    applicable] and read a third time?'' If that question is decided in the
    affirmative, then the bill or joint resolution shall be read the final
    time by title and then the question shall be put on its passage.

    [[Page 740]]

      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. 30269). 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).

    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 reading. The demand for the reading of the
    engrossed copy of a Senate bill cannot be made in the House (VIII,
    2426).

    [[Page 741]]

    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). If 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 the 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.

      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. 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. 43). A gender-based reference was
    eliminated in the 111th Congress (sec. 2(l), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, p.
    _). Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this
    provision was found in former clause 1 of rule XIV (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6,
    1999, p. 47). This clause, and rulings of the Chair with respect to
    references in debate to the Senate, are discussed in Sec. Sec. 361, 371,
    supra.

    [[Page 742]]

    audience, and the Chair takes the initiative to enforce
    this rule (see, e.g., Nov. 8, 1979, p. 31519; Sept. 29, 1983, p. 26501;
    Dec. 17, 1987, p. 36139; Oct. 17, 2005, p. 22907); (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, pp. 23949, 23950; Mar. 10, 2004, p.
    3849); (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; Oct. 2, 2003, p. 23950; May
    19, 2004, pp. 10107, 10108) because ignoring the gavel is not an act of
    civil disobedience but rather an act of stark incivility (July 28, 2009,
    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. 23950; May 19, 2004, pp. 10107, 10108); (9) Members may not
    use audio devices during debate (May 24, 2005, p. 11008). 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 the Chair's 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 (Nov. 1, 1983, p. 30267).
      The Speaker, who has a responsibility under rule I to maintain and
    enforce decorum in debate, and the chair 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

      Members should refrain from speaking disrespectfully of the Speaker or
    arraigning the personal conduct of the Speaker, and under the precedents
    the sanctions for such violations transcend the ordinary requirements
    for timeliness of challenges (II, 1248; Jan. 4, 1995, p. 551; Jan. 18,
    1995, p. 1441; Jan. 19, 1995, p. 1599). Engaging in personalities with
    respect to the Speaker's conduct is not in order even though possibly
    relevant to a pending resolution granting him certain authority (Sept.
    24, 1996, p. 24485).

    [[Page 743]]

    the Chair to proceed in order, subject to the will
    of the House on the question of proceeding in order (Sept. 18, 1996, p.
    23535).
      This clause also has been interpreted to proscribe the wearing of
    badges by Members to communicate a message, because 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. 18967). 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

      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 must be reduced to writing upon demand (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 a Member is not
    required to offer a resolution, as is the 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 744]]

    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. 7877). A Member
    recognized under the five-minute rule in the Committee of the Whole may
    not yield to another Member to offer an amendment, because 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
    discretion as to whether or not to 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 the Member will yield after
    having declined to do so (Apr. 9, 1992, p. 9040; Nov. 13, 1997, p.
    26533; Mar. 19, 2009, p. _). If a Member interrupts another during
    debate without being yielded to or otherwise recognized (as on a point
    of order), such 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 deprived of it 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), 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 may be
    interrupted for a conference report (V, 6451; VIII, 3294) or by a point
    of order (e.g., June 24, 2008, p. _). It is a custom also for the
    Speaker to request a Member to yield for the reception of a message. A
    Member may yield the floor for a motion to adjourn or that the Committee
    of the Whole rise without losing the right to continue when the subject
    is again continued (V, 5009-5013), but if 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 be
    seated while a paper is being read on the Member's time without losing
    the 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

    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 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 to 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. Remarks must be confined to the subject.

      It  has
    always been held, and generally quite strictly, that in the House
    remarks must be confined to the subject under debate (V, 5043-5048; VI,
    576; VIII, 2481, 2534). The Chair normally does not take initiative but
    waits for the question of relevancy of debate to be raised (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), which is untimely after intervening debate (July 31, 2007, p.
    21963).

    [[Page 745]]

    its nexus to the pending question (July 31, 2007, p.
    21965, p. 21966, p. 21967). Debate on a motion to amend must be confined
    to the amendment (or the second-degree amendment, as the case may be
    (July 31, 2007, p. 21966)), 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, pp. 14971, 14972, 14976 (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,
    p. 14623). Debate on a privileged resolution recommending disciplinary
    action against a Member, although 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).

    [[Page 746]]

      During debate on a bill, a Member under recognition must confine
    remarks to the pending legislation; that is, remarks must not dwell on
    another measure not before the House (Nov. 4, 1999, p. 28524; July 31,
    p. 21970), but rather 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).
    Although remarks comparing a pending question to a broader policy
    concern may be relevant, discussion of the broader policy concern may
    not stray from

      Although Speakers have entertained appeals from decisions as to
    irrelevancy, they have held such appeals 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, remarks did not have
    to be confined 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, if 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 747]]

      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 such
    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 discretion must be lodged with the presiding
    officer'' (II, 1424). And in 1881 the Speaker declined to entertain an
    appeal from his decision on a question of recognition (II, 1425-1428),
    establishing thereby a 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).--

    Sec. 950. Oneminute and specialorder
    speeches.

      Recognition  for one-minute speeches by unanimous consent and the
    order of recognition therefor are entirely within the discretion of the
    Speaker (Nov. 15, 1983, p. 32657; Mar. 7, 2001, p. 3027), who may
    decline a unanimous-consent request to increase the number (Sept. 16,
    2008, p. _; Mar. 21, 2010, p. _). 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, because 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 748]]

    from day to day;
    (7) the respective Leaders may establish additional guidelines for
    entering requests; and (8) the Speaker may withdraw recognition should
    circumstances warrant (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;
    Jan. 5, 2011, p. _).
      Since the 98th Congress the Speaker has followed announced policies of
    alternating recognition for one-minute speeches and special-order
    speeches between majority and minority Members (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). On February 24, 1994, the Speaker
    announced a new policy governing recognition for special-order speeches.
    The Speaker announced that the Chair would recognize for speeches of
    five minutes or less 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 consent). In the 112th Congress,
    the Speaker announced a new policy (effective February 1, 2011) of
    recognizing only for longer speeches following legislative business
    (Speaker Boehner, Jan. 5, 2011, p. _). Under the Speaker's policy: (1)
    recognition does not extend beyond 10 p.m.; (2) recognition is limited
    to four hours equally divided between the majority and minority; (3) the
    first hour for each party is reserved to its respective Leader or
    designee; (4) the second hour for each party is divided into two 30-
    minute periods; (5) time within each party is allotted in accord with a
    list submitted to the Chair by the respective Leader; (6) recognition
    for the first hour alternates between the parties

      Although 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). 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;
    July 21, 2009, p. _). 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). Under
    a former stricture, the Chair did not entertain a unanimous-consent
    request to extend a five-minute special-order speech (Mar. 7, 1995, p.
    7152; Sept. 29, 2009, p. _), to recognize for a special-order speech
    after midnight (May 10, 2007, p. 12222), or to extend a special-order
    speech beyond midnight (Oct. 7, 1998, p. 24394).

      The Chair may withdraw recognition during a special-order speech,
    declare a recess under clause 12 of rule I, and following the recess
    confer recognition for the remainder of the speech (Nov. 4, 2009, p.
    _).-

    [[Page 749]]

    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 debate.

      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 certain days for morning-hour debate
    (e.g., 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). On May 12, 1995 (p. 12765), the House extended and modified the
    above order to accommodate earlier convening times after mid-May of each
    year. Through the 111th Congress, the order applied only to Mondays and
    Tuesdays. Beginning on February 1, 2011, the House expanded the order to
    include Wednesdays and Thursdays. The above-cited orders of the House:
    (1) postpone the Prayer, approval of the Journal, and the Pledge of
    Allegiance during morning-hour debate; 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. Beginning in the 112th Congress, the order
    was altered to allow the filing of privileged reports during morning-
    hour debate (Jan. 5, 2011, p. _). Under the customary order of the House
    establishing morning-hour debate, the Chair does not entertain a
    unanimous-

    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 750]]

    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. 199)
    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 the House establishes a special order for
    consideration of a measure, only a manager identified by the terms of
    that order is recognized to call up the measure (Deschler, ch. 21,
    Sec. 1.25; Jan. 18, 2007, p. 1624). 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 chair 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 the Member to
    prior recognition on a motion relating to another matter (II, 1464). It
    is because the Speaker is governed by these usages that the Speaker
    often asks a Member seeking recognition, ``For what purpose does the
    gentleman (or gentlewoman) seek recognition?''. By this question the
    Speaker determines whether the Member proposes business or a motion that
    is entitled to precedence, and 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 the Member seeks to offer a motion to adjourn does not suffice to
    render 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. 16241; July 13, 2009, p. _). There is no appeal
    from such denial of recognition (II, 1425; VI, 292; VIII, 2429, 2646,
    2762; Feb. 27, 1992, p. 3656). Where the Chair confers recognition
    solely for the reading of a matter and not for debate, the Member so
    recognized may not yield to another for debate (Jan. 6, 2011, p. _).
    Recognition for parliamentary inquiry lies in the discretion of the
    Chair (VI, 541; Mar. 23, 2007, p. 7420, p. 7423), who may take a
    parliamentary inquiry under advisement (VIII, 2174), especially if 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, the
    Speaker is not a free agent in determining who is to have the floor. The
    practice of the House establishes rules from which the Speaker should
    not depart. For example, when the order of business brings before the
    House a certain bill the Speaker 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 chair
    of the committee, for a chair who, in committee, has opposed the bill,
    must yield the prior recognition to a member of the committee who has
    favored the bill (II, 1449). Usually, however, the chair 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 chair of the
    Committee of the Whole (II, 1453). Once the proponent of a pending
    motion has been recognized for debate thereon, a unanimous-consent
    request to modify the motion may be entertained only if the proponent
    yields for that purpose (Jan. 5, 1996, p. 348). In the case of a motion
    to instruct conferees (Mar. 29, 2006, p. 4377), a measure on which the
    previous question has been ordered without intervening motion (Feb. 13,
    2007, p. 3877, p. 3878; Mar. 4, 2010, p. _; July 1, 2010, p. _ (Chair
    corrected himself); Feb. 10, 2011, p. _, p. _, 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. 29061; Nov. 7, 2007, 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 introduces a bill has no claim to recognition as
    opposed to members of the reporting committee, but in cases in which a
    proposition is brought directly before the House 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

    [[Page 751]]

    to espouse a hypothetical outer limit (June 26,
    2009, p. _) and to announce the amount of time consumed (June 26, 2009,
    p. _; May 27, 2010, p. _).
      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, pp. 9944, 9945) and only the nominal time yielded
    for such debate is charged to the manager (June 26, 2009, p. _; June 24,
    2010, p. _). With regard to recognition for such additional time, the
    Chair has refused

    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 remarks (V, 5391-5395; VI, 412; VIII, 2649, 2650).

    [[Page 752]]

      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 not a member of the committee (II, 1445). The principle of
    alternation is not insisted on rigidly where a limited time is
    controlled by Members, as in the 40 minutes of debate on motions for
    suspension of the rules and the previous question (II, 1442).

    [[Page 753]]

    matter of discretionary recognition in the first
    instance (Sept. 27, 2006, p. 20065). ``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 cognizance of a
    source of objection for the Record (Feb. 4, 1998, p. 799). The Chair
    will not issue an advisory opinion on whether an amendment would be
    germane to a given proposition for purposes of obtaining clearances
    under this policy (Mar. 21, 2010, p. _). 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 chair 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). The
    Speaker 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 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 the 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; Feb. 10, 2011, p. _) and
    unreported measures (see, e.g., Dec. 15, 1981, p. 31590; Nov. 16, 1983,
    p. 33138; Jan. 25, 1984, p. 354; Jan. 26, 1984, p. 449; Jan. 31, 1984,
    p. 1063; 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; Mar. 20, 2010, p. _);
    (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); (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
    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

    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 754]]

    consent requests to enlarge the
    time for debate (Feb. 4, 2009, p. _; Feb. 13, 2009, p. _). In the 104th
    Congress the Speaker announced the intention to strictly enforce time
    limitations on debate (Jan. 4, 1995, pp. 457-552). The Chair has
    announced that the Chair 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; Nov. 21, 2003, p. 30793; Nov. 7, 2009, p.
    _; Mar. 21, 2010, 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 the hour
    without moving the previous question, thereby permitting another Member
    to be recognized for a successive hour (Dec. 18, 1998, p. 27838). Under
    this clause a Member recognized for one hour for a ``special-order''
    speech in the House may not extend that time, even by unanimous consent
    (Feb. 9, 1966, p. 2794; July 12, 1971, pp. 24594, 24603; Oct. 23, 1997,
    p. 23254). The Chair has advised that the Member in charge of measure
    would be recognized for unanimous-

    Managing debate
      For a discussion of morning-hour debate 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 755]]

      Paragraphs (a) and (c) (formerly clause 3 of rule XIV) were adopted in
    1847 and perfected in 1880 (V, 4996). Paragraph (b) (formerly clause 6
    of rule XIV) was adopted in 1789, and amended in 1840 (V, 4991). Before
    the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, paragraphs (a) and
    (c) were found in former clause 3 of rule XIV and paragraph (b) was
    found in former clause 6 of rule XIV. The recodification also added
    paragraph (c) to codify modern practice (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p.
    47).

      Where a special order of business allocates control of debate to
    specified Members, another may not separately claim time on the basis of
    opposition (Dec. 16, 2010, p. _).

      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). If 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). If 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 (e.g., Mar. 17, 2011, p. _). 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). A Member may yield a final amount of
    time to another for purposes of closing (Mar. 17, 2011, p. _). For
    further discussion of management of time for general debate and for
    debate on amendments in the Committee of the Whole, see Sec. 978, infra.

      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 after that Member has begun speaking
    (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 permitted to speak in the contest has been a
    matter of discussion (V, 5001).

    [[Page 756]]

    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 26, 2002, p. 14972) and including the manager
    of a measure that was reported adversely (Feb. 13, 2002, p. 1355). This
    is so even if 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 if the measure called up is unreported (Apr. 15, 1996, p. 7421;
    July 24, 1998, p. 17263), if an unreported compromise text is made in
    order as original text in lieu of committee amendments (Oct. 19, 1995,
    p. 28650), or if the committee reported the measure without
    recommendation (Feb. 12, 1997, pp. 2108, 2109). If the pending text
    includes a provision recommended by a committee of sequential referral,
    a member of that committee is entitled to close debate in opposition to
    an amendment thereto (June 15, 1989, pp. 12084-87). If 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 opposition 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, pp. 18585-87). 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,

    [[Page 757]]

    24, 1997, pp. 15684, 15685,
    15689). Similarly, the proponent of the amendment may close debate if no
    representative from the reporting committee opposes an amendment to a
    multijurisdictional bill (Mar. 9, 1995, p. 7467); if the measure is
    unreported and has no ``manager'' under the terms of a special rule
    (Apr. 24, 1985, p. 9206); or if 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 if representing 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 if a member of the
    committee does not claim time in opposition (May 13, 1998, p. 9092).
    Similarly, the proponent may close debate if 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, pp. 18585-
    87). If 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

    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 758]]

    or such other punishment as the House may 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

      The first sentence of paragraph (a) and all but the last sentence of
    paragraph (b) (formerly clause 4 of rule XIV) were 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)
    were 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 the
    Member (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 759]]

    in verbal outburst either following
    expiration of recognition for debate (Mar. 16, 1988, p. 4081) or during
    recognition of another Member (June 5, 2003, p. 13884). The Chair may
    order the offending Member to be seated (June 5, 2003, p. 13884) or may
    deny further recognition, subject to the will of the House on the
    question of 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

      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. 1899). However, a Member standing
    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. 8554). However, an improper parliamentary inquiry concerning
    the substantive content of the words does render untimely such demand
    (July 20, 2005, pp. 16653, 16654). 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 760]]

    in order (Sept. 12, 1996, p. 22900; Sept. 17, 1996, p.
    23427; Sept. 18, 1996, p. 23535; see also Sec. 366, supra).
      While a demand that a Member's words be taken down is pending, that
    Member should be seated immediately (July 29, 1994, p. 18609; Jan. 25,
    1995, p. 2352), and no Member may engage the Chair until the demand has
    been disposed of (Nov. 9, 1995, p. 31913; Nov. 14, 1995, p. 32472). If
    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, if 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

      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 a 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).

    [[Page 761]]

      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 the 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. 7074). 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).

      Where a Member has been called to order not in response to a formal
    demand that words be taken down but in response to a point of order, the
    former practice was to test the opinion of the House by a motion ``that
    the gentleman be allowed to proceed in order'' (V, 5188, 5189; VIII,
    2534). Under the modern practice the Chair either may invite the
    offending Member to proceed in order (see, e.g., Sept. 12, 1996, p.
    22898) or, particularly if admonitions have been ignored, may deny the
    Member recognition for the balance of the time for which 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).

      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 has proceeded to consider 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 762]]

    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 on the floor of the House may not smoke or use a mobile
    electronic device that impairs decorum. 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, 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) and again in the 112th Congress to cover any mobile
    electronic device that impairs decorum (sec. 2(e)(2), H. Res. 5, Jan. 5,
    2011, p. _). Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th
    Congress, this provision was found in former clause 7 of rule XIV (H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

    [[Page 763]]

    plying Members the privilege of the
    floor (July 17, 1979, pp. 19008, 19073). In the 106th and 109th
    Congresses Members were reminded of the need to be in proper attire in
    the Chamber (June 28, 2000, p. 12654; June 20, 2006, p. 11895), and the
    Chair has so admonished a Member speaking in debate without a jacket
    (Apr. 3, 2001, p. 5361). The donning of a distinctive uniform of another
    occupation is not proper (Oct. 20, 2009, p. _). 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 noncom

      Pursuant to the modification of this clause in the 112th Congress, the
    Speaker announced that mobile electronic devices that impair decorum
    include wireless telephones and personal computers, but that electronic
    tablet devices may be used unobtrusively in the Chamber, although no
    device may be used for still photography or for audio or video recording
    (Speaker Boehner, Jan. 5, 2011, p. _). The Chair has also announced that
    Members should disable wireless telephones on entering the Chamber
    (e.g., June 12, 2000, p. 10369).

      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);
    (2) that Members should not engage in disruption while another Member is
    speaking (Dec. 20, 1995, p. 37878), including shouting interjections
    during debate (Feb. 13, 2009, p. _). 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 764]]

    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).

    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

    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 the discretion of the Chair, 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 give the Chair the
    discretion to submit the question of its use to the House (sec. 2(o), H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 3, 2001, p. 25). A gender-based reference was eliminated in
    the 111th Congress (sec. 2(l), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, p. _). 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 765]]

      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 the
    disallowance 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. Although Members may use exhibits such as charts
    during debate subject to this rule, the Speaker may, pursuant to the
    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 766]]

    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). 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 the Member proposed to have read in his or
    her own time or to read in his or her place (V, 5293), and to excerpts
    from the Congressional Record (VIII, 2597). After the previous question
    was ordered, a Member could not ask the decision of the House on a
    request for the reading of a paper not before the House for action (V,
    5296), even though it be the report of the committee (V, 5294, 5295).
    For further discussion, see Sec. Sec. 432-436, supra. Pursuant to the
    former form of this rule, the consent of the House for a Member to read
    a paper in debate only permitted the Member seeking such permission to
    read as much of the paper as possible

    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
    takes the initiative to enforce this clause (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 767]]

    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. 23950; May 19, 2004, pp. 10107, 10108). Paragraph (a) also applies to
    statements and rulings of the Chair (Jan. 20, 1995, p. 1866). For a
    discussion of rules relating to the Congressional Record, see
    Sec. Sec. 685-692, supra.

    Secret sessions
      This clause was adopted in the 104th Congress (sec. 213, H. Res. 6,
    Jan. 4, 1995, p. 468). Before the House recodified its rules in the
    106th Congress, this provision was found in former clause 9 of rule XIV
    (H. Res.

    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 such
    individual has communications that such individual 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). Gender-based references were
    eliminated in the 111th Congress (sec. 2(l), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, p.
    _). 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 768]]

    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 chair 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 having
    additional communications to make (May 10, 2007, p. 12114, 12177). The
    motion for a secret session is not debatable (June 20, 1979, p. 15711;
    Mar. 31, 1998, p. 5229; Sept. 26, 2006, p. 19781) but is subject to the
    motion to lay on the table (May 10, 2007, p. 12177).

      The following procedures apply during a secret session. 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 the
    manager yields for that purpose, apply. The Speaker having found that a
    Member has qualified to make the motion for a secret session, having
    confidential communications to make, no point of order lies that the
    material in question must be submitted to the Members to make that
    determination (the motion for a secret session having been adopted by
    the House). No point of order lies in secret session that employees
    designated by the Speaker as essential to the proceedings, who have
    signed an oath of secrecy, may not be present. A motion in secret
    session to make public the proceedings therein is debatable for one
    hour, within narrow limits of relevancy. At the conclusion of debate in
    secret session, a Member may be recognized to offer a motion that the
    session be dissolved (July 17, 1979, pp. 19057-59).

      Where the House has concluded a secret session and has not voted to
    release the transcripts of that session, the injunction of secrecy
    remains and the Speaker may informally refer the transcripts to
    appropriate committees for their evaluation and report to the House as
    to ultimate disposition to be made (June 20, 1979, pp. 15711-13). The
    House may subsequently by unanimous consent order printed in the
    Congressional Record such proceedings, with appropriate deletions and
    revisions agreeable to the committees (July 17, 1979, p. 19049).

    [[Page 769]]

    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).
      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

      On March 13, 2008, the House by unanimous consent authorized the Chair
    to resolve the House into secret session pursuant to this rule, that
    debate therein proceed without intervening motion for one hour equally
    divided and controlled by the Majority Leader and the Minority Whip, and
    that at the conclusion of debate the secret session be dissolved and the
    House stand adjourned (p. _). Before commencement of that secret
    session, the Speaker pro tempore (1) read to the House the contents of
    clause 9; (2) announced a recess to clear the galleries and floor of all
    persons except Members and necessary staff, to permit staff to sign a
    notarized oath of secrecy, and to conduct a security sweep of the
    Chamber; (3) reminded Members of clause 13 of the Code of Official
    Conduct; (4) announced that all proceedings in secret session would
    remain secret unless otherwise ordered by the House; (5) announced that
    three bells would be rung approximately 15 minutes before the House
    reconvened for the secret session (Mar. 13, 2008, p. _).

      The House conducted a 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 because the Speaker must rely on the assurance of a Member
    claiming to have confidential communications to make to the House, and
    because 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).

     end segment .010 segment .011 -- rule XVIII through XXI

    [[Page 770]]

      Under the 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 Chair of Committee of the Whole; and the
    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 as Chair to preside. In
    case of disturbance or disorderly conduct in the galleries or lobby, the
    Chair may cause the same to be cleared.

      This provision (formerly clause 1(a) of rule XXIII), adopted in 1880,
    was made from two older rules dating from 1789 and modified in 1794 to
    provide for the appointment of the Chair 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), reinstated in the 110th Congress (H. Res. 78,
    Jan. 24, 2007, p. 2140), and repealed in the 112th Congress (sec.
    2(e)(4), H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 2011, p. _). A Delegate first presided under
    the former authority on October 6, 1994 (p. 28533). Gender-based
    references were eliminated in the 111th Congress (sec. 2(l), H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 6, 2009, p. _). Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th
    Congress, this provision was found in former clause 1(a) of rule XXIII
    (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

    Sec. 971. Functions of the chair of the Committee of the
    Whole.

      The  Sergeant-at-Arms attends the sittings of the Committee of the
    Whole and, under direction of the Chair, maintains order (I, 257). After
    repeated disturbances in the gallery, the Chair warned its occupants of
    possible prosecution (under 40 U.S.C. 5104) and, in response to a
    parliamentary inquiry, affirmed his authority to have the gallery
    cleared (Apr. 15, 2011, p. _). The Chair recognizes for debate (V,
    5003). Like the Speaker, the Chair is forbidden to recognize for
    requests to suspend the rule of admission to the floor (V, 7285).

    [[Page 771]]

    liamentary inquiry relating to
    possible proceedings in the House on a motion to recommit (Feb. 27,
    2002, p. 2079). The Chair 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).
      The Chair 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
    Chair does not respond to a par

      Decisions of the Chair 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, pp. 15854-56). A
    majority vote sustains the ruling (Aug. 1, 1989, p. 17159).

      The Chair 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 the Chair 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 Chair to determine whether
    or not the Committee shall rise (V, 6736, 6737). The Chair may declare
    an emergency recess under clause 12 of rule I. In rare cases wherein the
    Chair has been defied or insulted, the Chair 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 Chair may direct the exclusion of disorderly words spoken by
    a Member after having 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).

    [[Page 772]]

    House on
    the state of the Union for consideration of this matter?'', naming it.

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

      2. (a)  Except as provided in paragraph (b)
    and in clause 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

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

    Measures requiring initial consideration in the Committee of the Whole
      Paragraph (a) was adopted when the House recodified its rules in the
    106th Congress to codify the form of the motion to resolve into the
    Committee of the Whole (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). A conforming
    change to paragraph (a) was effected in the 109th Congress (sec. 2(f),
    H. Res. 5, Jan. 4, 2005, p. 43). 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).

    [[Page 773]]

    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.

    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 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).

      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). If the expenditure is a mere matter of speculation
    (IV, 4818-4821; VIII, 2388), or if the bill might involve a charge but
    does not necessarily do so (IV, 4809, 4810), the rule does not apply.
    However, if 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).

    [[Page 774]]

    ation of a measure on the Union Calendar in
    the House (see, e.g., Apr. 26, 2001, p. 6299).
      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). In the modern
    practice of the House, a special order reported from the Committee on
    Rules that makes in order no amendments, or only one amendment, normally
    provides for consider

      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(k)(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.

    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.

    [[Page 775]]

      (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 by the Committee Reform Amendments of 1974 (H.
    Res. 988, 93d Cong., Oct. 8, 1974, p. 34470), which revoked the
    privilege to report such bills at any time.

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

    [[Page 776]]

    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.

    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

      (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 777]]

    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 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

      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). If 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
    chair or ranking minority member under the governing special rule (Mar.
    9, 2005, pp. 3928, 3932). 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.

      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. 21155, p. 21157, p.
    21158). However, a Member may not, in time yielded for general 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).

    [[Page 778]]

    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). If 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). If 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 a 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. If 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).

      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 the
    floor be read for amendment by sections is not in order (Mar. 25, 1975,
    p. 8490). The chair 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).

      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). If 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). If a bill is considered by title, the
    adoption of an amendment inserting a new title precludes subsequent
    amendment to the previous title (Sept. 14, 2005, p. 20220; see also
    Deschler-Brown, ch. 27, Sec. 10.13).

    [[Page 779]]

    Chair may direct a return to a section
    whereon, by error, no action was had on a pending amendment (IV, 4750).
      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

      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. 12565). 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
    remaining standing (June 10, 1998, p. 11976); and must confine remarks
    to the subject (V, 5240-5256; VIII, 2591). If 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. 11199). For a further
    discussion of management of time for debate on amendments in the
    Committee of the Whole, see Sec. 959, supra.

      Where the Chair recognizes the proponent of an amendment to propound a
    unanimous-consent request to modify the text of the amendment before
    commencing debate thereon, the Chair does not charge time consumed under
    a reservation of objection against the proponent's time for debate on
    the amendment (Feb. 3, 1993, p. 1978; May 27, 1993, p. 11931).

      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 declare in
    advance the order in which Members proposing amendments will be
    recognized (Deschler-Brown, ch. 29, Sec. 21.3).

    [[Page 780]]

      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, pp. 12944, 12945).-

    [[Page 781]]

    Quorum and voting

    Sec. 981. Pro forma amendments under the fiveminute
    rule.

      The pro  forma amendment to ``strike 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) but
    the Chair does not as a matter of course put the question on a pro forma
    amendment. 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 each to a
    pending amendment and a second-degree amendment thereto (June 12, 2007,
    p. 15525; July 31, 2007, pp. 21962, 21963), but not more than one (July
    31, 2007, p. 21967). A Member who has offered a substantive amendment
    and then debated it for five minutes may not extend that time by
    offering a pro forma amendment, because it is not in order for the
    offeror of an amendment to amend his or her 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, because 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, but may in yielding indicate to the
    Chair when the Member intends to reclaim 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). A pro forma amendment may not be
    offered while a point of order is pending (Feb. 16, 2011, p. _).

    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 Chair shall invoke the
    procedure for a quorum call set forth in clause 2 of rule XX, unless the
    Chair 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 Chair shall report the names of
    absentees to the House.

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

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

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

    [[Page 782]]

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

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

      It was the early practice for the Committee of the Whole to rise on
    finding itself without a quorum (IV, 2977), and it was not until 1847
    that a rule (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 give the Chair discretion to
    vacate proceedings under the call 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 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. Gender-based references were eliminated in
    the 111th Congress (sec. 2(l), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, p. _). 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).

    [[Page 783]]

    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)). If a recorded vote on a prior
    amendment or motion during consideration under 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 chair of the Committee of the Whole must entertain a point of
    order of no quorum during consideration under the five-minute rule if a
    quorum

      Clause 6(c) permits the chair of the Committee of the Whole to
    announce in advance, at the time that the absence of a quorum is
    ascertained, an intention to 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 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
    Chair normally directs that Members record their presence by electronic
    device. The Chair may however, in the Chair's 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 784]]

    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 an
    immediately prior count on a point of no quorum and on the Chair's
    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). Although 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 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

    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. 16849).

      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. 15522), 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. 15527, pp. 15689, 15690) 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.

    [[Page 785]]

      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 Chair has reported the bill or
    resolution back to the House. The Chair 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).

      Under the modern practice, the Committee of the Whole may rise
    informally without motion to enable the Chair to lay an enrolled bill
    before the House (Jan. 28, 1980, p. 888; Apr. 30, 1980, p. 9505).

      (e) In the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union, the
    Chair 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 Chair may reduce to not less than two 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). A gender-based reference was eliminated in the 111th
    Congress (sec. 2(l), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, p. _). 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. 28739) 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. 11037). A motion to
    vacate a pending vote by electronic device is not in order (May 8, 2008,
    p. _).

    [[Page 786]]

      (g) The Chair may postpone a request for a recorded vote on any
    amendment. The Chair may resume proceedings on a postponed request at
    any time. The Chair may reduce to not less than two minutes the minimum
    time for electronic voting on any postponed question that follows
    another electronic vote without intervening business, provided that the
    minimum time for electronic voting on the first in any series of
    questions shall be 15 minutes.

      Paragraph (f) was added in the 102d Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 3,
    1991, p. 39). Paragraph (g) was added in the 107th Congress (H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 3, 2001, p. 25). Gender-based references were eliminated from both
    in the 111th Congress (sec. 2(l), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, p. _). Both
    were amended in the 112th Congress to permit the Chair to reduce the
    minimum time for voting to not less than two minutes (instead of to five
    minutes) (sec. 2(3)(1), H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 2011, p. _). Such two-minute
    voting had previously been granted ad hoc by unanimous consent in the
    House (e.g., Mar. 16, 2006, p. 3767) 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 reduced-time vote
    under paragraph (f) (July 22, 1994, p. 17609). Pursuant to paragraph
    (g), the Chair may resume proceedings on a postponed question at any
    time, even while an amendment is pending (May 24, 2011, p. _).

      Before the adoption of paragraph (g), the chair 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, pp. 16487,
    16488; see also Mar. 30, 2000, p. 4037). Special rules of the House
    before adoption of paragraph (g) commonly provided the chair 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 Chair could resume
    proceedings on unfinished business consisting of a ``stack'' of
    amendments even while an amendment was pending (July 10, 2000, p.
    13615).

    [[Page 787]]

    express gratitude to the Members on a
    personal matter, is considered intervening business such as to preclude
    a reduced-time 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, pp. 14173 0975) unless
    the request proposes that the Chair put the question de novo (Sept. 22,
    2004, pp. 18957, 18958, 18962).
      Pursuant to this clause, where the Chair has announced that the Chair
    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 Chair's
    announcement (see Sec. 1026, infra). The offering of a pro forma
    amendment to discuss the legislative program, or an extended one-minute
    speech by a Member to

    Sec. 985. Former provision for de novo vote where
    Delegates decisive.

      When  the 103d Congress enabled voting by the Delegates
    and Resident Commissioner in the Committee of the Whole (see Sec. 675,
    supra), it also added a new paragraph (h) to clause 6 (former clause
    2(d) of rule XXIII) to provide 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 (H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 1993, p. 49). Such voting and
    reconsideration thereof was repealed in the 104th Congress (sec. 212(c),
    H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 468), reinstated in the 110th Congress (H.
    Res. 78, Jan. 24, 2007, p. 2140), and repealed in the 112th Congress
    (sec. 2(e)(4), H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 2011, p. _).

    Dispensing with the reading of an amendment
      Under the former paragraph (h), whether the votes cast by the
    delegates were decisive was 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. 3550). The Chair's
    count in such matter was not subject to appeal (Feb. 8, 2007, p. 3550).
    The Chair did 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. 3579). An amendment adopted by
    immediate proceedings de novo in the House did not disturb the sequence
    of a ``king-of-the-hill'' procedure established by a special rule
    waiving all points of order against subsequent amendments (Mar. 17,
    1994, p. 5388). Former paragraph (h) was applicable only to votes taken
    in the Committee of the Whole (Mar. 11, 2008, p. _).

    [[Page 788]]

    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.

    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

    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 789]]

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

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

      This clause (formerly clause 6 of rule XXIII) was adopted in 1860,
    with amendments in 1880 and 1885 (V, 5221, 5224). Paragraph (b),
    permitting 10 minutes for debate on an amendment that has been printed
    in the Record even after the Committee of the Whole closes debate, was
    inserted in the 92d Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 22, 1971, p. 144)
    following the enactment of an identical provision in section 119 of the
    Legislative Reorganization Act of 1970 (84 Stat. 1140). In the 105th
    Congress that provision was amended to accommodate the printing of
    amendments to measures not yet reported (H. Res. 5, Jan. 7, 1997, p.
    121). The third sentence, relating to the procedure for submitting and
    printing of amendments, was added in the 93d Congress (H. Res. 1387,
    Nov. 25, 1974, p. 37270). The last sentence, relating to the numbering
    of printed amendments, was added in the 104th Congress (sec. 217, H.
    Res. 6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 468). Before the House recodified its rules in
    the 106th Congress, this provision was found in former clause 6 of rule
    XXIII (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). A clerical correction was
    effected to paragraph (c) in the 107th Congress (sec. 2(x), H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 3, 2001, p. 26).

    [[Page 790]]

    thereafter (July 18, 1968, p. 22110), debate on
    an amendment printed in the Record may nevertheless proceed for 10
    minutes under this clause (Aug. 2, 1973, p. 27715). Printing an
    amendment in the Record under this clause permits debate notwithstanding
    a limitation of debate only if the amendment has been properly offered,
    and does not permit the offering of an amendment not otherwise in order
    under the rules (Apr. 23, 1975, p. 11491); and the guaranteed five
    minutes may be claimed only if the offeror of the amendment is the
    Member who caused it to be printed under the rule (June 1, 1976, p.
    16044; June 29, 1989, p. 13928; June 19, 1991, p. 15473). The guaranteed
    time applies to an amendment offered as a substitute for another
    amendment, rather than as a primary amendment, if offered in the precise
    form printed (June 26, 1979, p. 16682), but where such a substitute
    amendment has not been printed in the Record it may not be debated
    unless time is yielded within the original 10 minutes (Dec. 10, 1987, p.
    34710). Where a special order requires amendments to be printed in the
    Record to qualify during the consideration of a bill under the five-
    minute rule, but makes no designation concerning offerors, any printed
    amendment may be offered by any Member (Mar. 22, 1990, p. 5017); but
    only the Member causing the amendment to be printed is entitled to the
    time for debate guaranteed by this clause.
      The Speaker announced that amendments to be printed in the Record
    pursuant to this clause must be deposited in a separate box at the
    Rostrum 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

      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, although 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). Although the Committee of the Whole
    may limit debate on amendments, it may not restrict the offering of
    amendments in contravention of a special order adopted by the House
    (June 25, 1985, p. 17201). The Committee of the Whole by unanimous
    consent may limit and allocate control of time for debate on amendments
    not yet offered (May 6, 1998, p. 8348). The motion may be ruled out when
    dilatory (V, 5734).

    [[Page 791]]

    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).
      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

      Under a limitation on debate the Chair may, in the Chair's 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 the Chair's 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 the Chair's discretion,
    continue to proceed under the five-minute rule until desiring to
    allocate remaining time on possible amendments, and may then divide that
    time among proponents of anticipated amendments and committee members
    opposing those amendments (e.g., July 16, 1981, p. 16044; Feb. 28, 1995,
    pp. 6306-08). The Chair has discretion to reallocate time to conform to
    the limit set by unanimous consent of the Committee of the Whole (Mar.
    16, 1995, p. 8115).

    [[Page 792]]

    the manager is the proponent of a pending amendment to the
    amendment (Mar. 16, 1983, p. 5792).

    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

    988. The motion to strike 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 793]]

    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 the enacting clause dates
    from a time as early as 1812, but the first rule on the subject was not
    adopted until 1822. By amendments in 1860, 1870, and 1880 the rule has
    been brought into its present form (V, 5326). The rule before 1880
    applied in the House as well as in Committee of the Whole. In the
    revision of 1880, it was classified among the rules relating to the
    Committee of the Whole, but there is nothing to indicate that this
    change was intended to limit the scope of the motion. It was probably a
    recognition merely of the fact that the motion was used most frequently
    in Committee of the Whole (V, 5326, 5332). Before the House recodified
    its rules in the 106th Congress, this provision was found in former
    clause 7 of rule XXIII (H. Res. 5, Jan.

    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). If a special order provides that a bill shall be open to
    amendment in Committee of the Whole, a motion to strike the enacting
    words is in order (VII, 787); contra (IV, 3215), but after the stage of
    amendment has been passed the motion to strike 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 if
    no committee amendments are in fact offered (Apr. 16, 1970, p. 12092).

      The motion is debatable as to the merits of the bill, but may not go
    beyond its provisions (V, 5336). The debate on the motion is governed by
    the five-minute rule (V, 5333-5335; VIII, 2618, 2628-2631); only two
    five-minute speeches are in order (V, 5335; VIII, 2629), and time may
    not be reserved (May 22, 1991, p. 11830); thus where a Member recognized
    for five minutes in opposition to the motion yields back the 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.

    [[Page 794]]

    pursuant to a special order does qualify
    as a modification of the bill (June 20, 1975, p. 19970). A motion that
    is withdrawn by unanimous consent rather than voted on by the Committee
    does not preclude the offering of another motion on the same day without
    a material modification of the bill (May 9, 1996, p. 10758).
      A second motion to strike 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

      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, the motion to strike 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 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).

    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).

    [[Page 795]]

    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.

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

    [[Page 796]]

    graph (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).
      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 para

    Applicability of Rules of the House

    Sec. 991. Former amendment to strike an unfunded
    mandate.

      A  prior clause 11 (formerly clause 5(c) of rule XXIII) provided
    that an amendment in the Committee of the Whole proposing only to strike
    an unfunded mandate from a portion of the bill, could be precluded only
    by specific terms of a special order of business. It was repealed in the
    112th Congress (sec. 2(e)(5), H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 2011, p. _). For the
    text of the former rule and its history, see Sec. 991 of the House Rules
    and Manual for the 111th Congress (H. Doc. 110-162).

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

      11.  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). It was
    redesignated as clause 11 when a prior clause 11 was repealed in the
    112th Congress (sec. 2(e)(5), H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 2011, p. _).

    [[Page 797]]

    June 21, 1989, p. 12744); (5) to change the scheme for
    control (other than among committees controlling time) (Oct. 9, 1986, p.
    29984; Jan. 26, 2011, p. _) 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, pp. 1923, 1925 (Chair corrected himself)) of
    general debate specified by the House, including a ``wrap up'' debate
    following the amendment process (Mar. 25, 2004, pp. 5318 0920) but the
    allotment of time to a chair or ranking minority member inurs to all
    members of the committee (Nov. 5, 2009, p. _); (6) to preempt the
    Chair's discretion (granted by a special order) to postpone and cluster
    votes or to schedule further consideration of a pending measure to a
    subsequent day (June 4, 1992, p. 13625; July 13, 1995, p. 18872); (7) to
    postpone a vote on an appeal of a ruling of the Chair (June 8, 2000, p.
    9954); (8) to permit an amendment offered by another Member to an
    amendment rendered unamendable by a special order or to permit a
    subsequent amendment changing such unamendable amendment already adopted
    (Nov. 18, 1987, p. 32643; July 26, 1989, p. 16411; July 24, 1996, p.
    18907); (9) to permit consideration of an amendment out of the order
    specified in a special rule (May 25, 1988, p. 12275; Oct. 3, 1990, p.
    27354; Oct. 31, 1991, p. 29359; Nov. 19, 1993, p. 30472; June 10, 1998,
    p. 11914; July 29, 1999, p. 18735; May 3, 2007, p. 11198); (10) to
    permit consideration of an additional amendment (July 28, 1988, p.
    19491; June 10, 1998, p. 11914; June 24, 2005, p. 14215; Mar. 15, 2006,
    p. 3702); (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,
    pp. 14678, 14692).

    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;

    [[Page 798]]

    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, pp. 5318 0920) but not for an unspecified amount, such as
    the ``time that the Speaker may claim to speak on her side of this
    issue'' (May 27, 2010, 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. 3144); (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
    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 (June 24, 2005, p. 14182); Mar. 28,
    2007, p. 8168); (13) to vacate a pending recorded vote in favor of
    taking the question de novo (although a motion to that effect is not
    available) (May 8, 2008, 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)

    [[Page 799]]

      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
    chair of the Committee of the Whole to postpone and cluster requests for
    recorded votes on amendments (which, before the adoption of that clause,
    was commonly provided by special orders of the House), and the Chair's
    interpretation thereof, see Sec. 984, supra.

                                    Rule XIX

    Previous question
                      motions following the amendment stage

    994. The previous question.

      1. (a)  There shall be a motion
    for the previous question, which, being ordered, shall have the effect
    of cutting off all debate and bringing the House to a direct vote on the
    immediate question or questions on which it has been ordered. Whenever
    the previous question has been ordered on an otherwise debatable
    question on which there has been no debate, it shall be in order to
    debate that question for 40 minutes, equally divided and controlled by a
    proponent of the question and an opponent. The previous question may be
    moved and ordered on a single question, on a series of questions
    allowable under the rules, or on an amendment or amendments, or may
    embrace all authorized motions or amendments and include the bill or
    resolution to its passage, adoption, or rejection.

    [[Page 800]]

    motion to commit from
    clause 1 of rule XVII to clause 2 of this rule (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999,
    p. 47).
      The House adopted a rule for the previous question in 1789, but did
    not turn it into an instrument for closing debate until 1811. The
    history of the motion for the previous question is discussed in V, 5443,
    5446; VIII, 2661. In 1880 the previous question rule was amended to
    apply to single motions or a series of motions as well as to amendments,
    and the motion to commit pending the motion for the previous question or
    after the previous question is ordered to passage was added (V, 5443).
    From 1880 to 1890, the previous question could only be ordered to the
    engrossment and third reading, and then again ordered on passage, but in
    1890 the rule was changed to permit ordering the previous question to
    final passage (V, 5443). When the House recodified its rules in the
    106th Congress, it consolidated former clause 1 of rule XVII and a
    provision included in former clause 2 of rule XXVII, permitting 40
    minutes debate on which the previous question has been ordered without
    there having been debate under this clause. The 106th Congress also
    transferred the provision addressing the

      The previous question is the only motion used for closing debate in
    the House itself (V, 5456; VIII, 2662). It is not in order in Committee
    of the Whole (IV, 4716; Apr. 25, 1990, p. 8257) but is in order ``in the
    House as in Committee of the Whole'' (VI, 639). The motion may not
    include a provision that it shall take effect at a certain time (V,
    5457).

    Sec. 996. Application of the previous
    question.

      The  provisions of the rule define the application of the
    previous question with considerable accuracy. It may not be moved on
    more than one bill, or on motions to agree to a conference report 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 to the preamble, unless the motion so specifies (V, 5469,
    5470). Thus, the practice of the House is for special rules to order the
    previous question on a resolution and on its preamble. It may be moved
    on a series of resolutions, but this does not preclude a division of the
    resolutions on the vote (V, 5468), although where two propositions on
    which the previous question is moved are related, as in the case of a
    special order reported from the Committee on Rules and a pending
    amendment thereto, a division is not in order (Sept. 25, 1990, p.
    25575). The previous question is often ordered on nondebatable
    propositions to prevent amendment (V, 5473, 5490), but may not be moved
    on a motion that is both nondebatable and unamendable (IV, 3077). It
    applies to questions of privilege as to other questions (II, 1256; V,
    5459, 5460; VIII, 2672).

    [[Page 801]]

    question thereon, even over the chair 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, that Member 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 surrendering 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), another Member may move the previous question on the bill or
    resolution 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), the previous question may not be moved until the other side
    has used or yielded back its time; and the Chair may vacate the adoption
    of the previous question where it was improperly moved while the other
    side was still seeking time (Oct. 3, 1989, p. 22842). The previous
    question may not be demanded on a proposition against which a point of
    order is pending (VIII, 3433).

    Sec. 997. The right to move the previous
    question.

      The  Member in charge of the bill and having the floor may demand
    the previous question, although another Member may propose a motion of
    higher privilege (VIII, 2684), 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 of the floor (V, 5476; VIII, 2685). The Member who
    has called up a measure in the House has priority of recognition to move
    the previous

    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).

    [[Page 802]]

    tion 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. 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) but not before it is ordered (Nov. 6, 2007, p.
    29820). 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 mo

    Sec. 1000. Questions of order pending the motion for the
    previous question.

      (b)  Incidental questions of order arising during the
    pendency of a motion for the previous question shall be decided, whether
    on appeal or otherwise, without debate.

      This provision was adopted in 1837 to prevent delay by debate on
    points of order after the demand for the previous question (V, 5448).
    Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this
    provision was found in former clause 3 of rule XVII (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6,
    1999, p. 47). The Chair may recognize and respond to a parliamentary
    inquiry although the previous question may have been demanded (Mar. 27,
    1926, p. 6469).

      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).

    Sec. 1000a. Postponement.

      (c)  Notwithstanding paragraph (a),
    when the previous question is operating to adoption or passage of a
    measure pursuant to a special order of business, the Chair may postpone
    further consideration of such measure in the House to such time as may
    be designated by the Speaker.

    [[Page 803]]

    Recommit
      This provision was adopted in the 111th Congress (sec. 2(f), H. Res.
    5, Jan. 6, 2009, p. _). This authority has been exercised with regard to
    a motion to dispose of amendments between the Houses (e.g., Nov. 18,
    2010, p. _).

    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)(1) Except as provided in paragraph (c), a motion that the House
    recommit a bill or joint resolution on which the previous question has
    been ordered to passage shall be debatable for 10 minutes equally
    divided between the proponent and an opponent.

      (2) A motion to recommit a bill or joint resolution may include
    instructions only in the form of a direction to report an amendment or
    amendments back to the House forthwith.

      (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 804]]

    graph (b) was amended in the 111th
    Congress to allow for debate on the straight motion, and subparagraph
    (2) was added to restrict the range of permissible instructions to those
    ``forthwith'' (sec. 2(g), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, _). 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). Paragraph
    (c) and an earlier form of paragraph (b), relating to debate on the
    motion to recommit with instructions, were added to former clause 4 of
    rule XVI by section 123 of the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1970
    and made a part of the standing rules in the 92d Congress (H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 21, 1971, p. 14). Para

    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 the 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 805]]

    Committee on Rules is prohibited from
    reporting a special order that precludes the motion to recommit as
    provided in clause 2 of rule XIX (VIII, 2260, 2262-2264; see also
    Sec. 1001, supra). That provision was amended in the 104th Congress to
    further prohibit the Committee on Rules from denying the Minority Leader
    or a 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

      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.

      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 does not apply to a motion to recommit a simple or
    concurrent resolution or a conference report, because 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;
    June 30, 2010, p. _). 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 is not ``controlled,'' and therefore
    Members may not reserve or yield blocks of time (July 26, 2006, p.
    16072), a Member under recognition may yield to another while remaining
    standing (Feb. 27, 2002, p. 2081).

    [[Page 806]]

    ment striking all of the proposed
    instructions and substituting others cannot be ruled out as interfering
    with the right of the minority to move recommittal (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 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 amend

      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). If the House adopts a motion to recommit with
    instructions that the committee report ``forthwith,'' the chair reports
    at once without awaiting action by the committee (V, 5545-5547; VIII,
    2730), the bill is before the House for immediate consideration (V,
    5550; VIII, 2735), the amendment(s) must be adopted by the House (VIII,
    2734), and an amendment may be divided if otherwise divisible (June 29,
    1993, p. 14618; May 28, 2010, p. _). When recommitted without such
    instructions, the measure is before the committee anew (IV, 4557; V,
    5558).

      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). 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).

      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).

    [[Page 807]]

    2736, 2760, 2761, 2763; June 22, 2005, p. 13540).
    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).
      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,

      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, pp. 8590, 8591).
    A point of order against a motion to recommit that initially is reserved
    pending its reading may be insisted upon before commencement of debate
    thereon (July 12, 2007, p. 18843) but not after (Mar. 5, 2008, p. _).

      Before the adoption of paragraph (b)(2) in the 111th Congress, it was
    permissible to direct a committee to study an issue (with or without
    amendatory instructions) and to report ``promptly'' its recommendations
    (Mar. 29, 1990, p. 1834) as long as they were germane and not
    argumentative (Sept. 23, 1992, p. 27178). Such motions sent the bill or
    joint resolution 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. 11187). When a bill was so recommitted,
    the committee had to confine itself to the instructions (IV, 4404; V,
    5526).

    Sec. 1002c. Recognition to offer motion.

      Before  former
    clause 4 of rule XVI was amended in 1909 to give priority in recognition
    for the motion to recommit to an opponent of a bill or joint resolution
    pending final passage, it was held that the opponents of a bill had no
    claim to prior recognition (II, 1456). Although the provision as amended
    in 1909 applied only to bills and joint resolutions, the principle
    embodied in that provision was applied also to motions to recommit
    simple or concurrent resolutions or conference reports under former
    clause 1 of rule XVII (VIII, 2764; Nov. 28, 1979, p. 33914). When the
    House consolidated the last sentence of former clause 1 of rule XVII and
    provisions of former clause 4 of rule XVI, addressing the motion to
    recommit, under this clause (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47), the
    sentence conferring prior recognition to the opposition was formally
    applied to all measures. However, precedents under former clause 1 of
    rule XVII still dictate that recognition to offer a motion to commit a
    resolution offered from the floor as a privileged matter without having
    been referred to committee does not depend on opposition to the
    resolution or on party affiliation (Speaker Albert, Feb. 19, 1976, p.
    3920).

    [[Page 808]]

    has had the motion read by the Clerk, that Member
    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, pp. 25640, 25643; Apr. 26, 2006, pp. 6196, 6197; May 4, 2006, pp.
    7031, 7032). 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, of opposition to the
    bill; and the Chair 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. 13845, 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. 6197).
      When applying this rule the Speaker looks first to the Minority Leader
    or a 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

    [[Page 809]]

    29,
    1998, p. 7156) or obtain unanimous consent if not (e.g., Mar. 14, 2007,
    p. 6386).

    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 chair (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 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 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.

    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).

      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).

    [[Page 810]]

    VIII, 2778-2780). Where the yeas and nays
    have not been ordered, any Member, irrespective of whether voting 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 voted 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).

    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 such Member 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;

    [[Page 811]]

    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 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 or her
    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

      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 the 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 812]]

    tice, ch. 43, Sec. 12). 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
    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), but recent practice does not admit
    the motion (House Prac

    [[Page 813]]

    (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
    the title is disposed of (I, 335); but when, in such a case, the motion
    is disposed of, the right to be sworn is complete (I, 622). When the
    motion to reconsider is decided in the affirmative the question
    immediately recurs on the question reconsidered (V, 5703). When a vote
    whereby an amendment has been agreed to is reconsidered the amendment
    becomes simply a pending amendment (V, 5704). When the vote ordering the
    previous question is reconsidered, it is in order to withdraw the motion
    for the previous question, the ``decision'' having been nullified (V,
    5357). When the previous question has been ordered on a series of
    motions and its force has not been exhausted, the reconsideration of the
    vote on one of the motions does not throw it open to debate

    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 814]]

    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; Sept. 20, 1979, p. 25512; July 2,
    1980, p. 18355). Where a resolution providing for the order of business
    was agreed to without adoption of the previous question, the Speaker
    advised that a motion to reconsider would be debatable and that the
    Member moving the reconsideration would be recognized to control the one
    hour of debate (Speaker McCormack, Sept. 13, 1965, p. 23608).

    Sec. 1011. Application of motion to reconsider to bills in
    committees.

      4.  A bill, petition, memorial, or resolution referred to
    a committee, or reported therefrom for printing and recommitment, may
    not be brought back to the House on a motion to reconsider.

      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 815]]

      (b) If a Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner requests a
    recorded vote, and that request is supported by at least one-fifth of a
    quorum, the vote shall be taken by electronic device unless the Speaker
    invokes another procedure for recording votes provided in this rule. A
    recorded vote taken in the House under this paragraph shall be
    considered a vote by the yeas and nays.

      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).

      One of the suppositions on which parliamentary law is founded is that
    the Speaker will not betray the 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 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).

    [[Page 816]]

    count of Members demanding a recorded vote is not
    appealable (June 24, 1976, p. 20390).
      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

      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, although 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. 18993). 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. 18993). A parliamentary inquiry, or remarks uttered
    without recognition, immediately following the Chair's announcement of a
    voice vote on an amendment is not such intervening business as to
    prevent a demand for a recorded vote thereon where the Chair has not
    announced the final disposition of the amendment (May 23, 1984, p.
    13928; July 26, 1984, p. 21249; June 10, 1998, p. 11856). A demand for a
    recorded vote may be untimely even if the body has not moved on to other
    business (June 26, 2007, p. _).

      The ordering of a recorded vote may be vacated by unanimous consent
    (May 28, 2010, p. _).

    Sec. 1013. Former ordering of tellers and taking of the
    vote.

      Under  the precedents recorded before the abolition of tellers, it was
    the duty of the Member to serve as teller when appointed by the Chair
    (V, 5987); but when Members of one side had declined, the second teller
    was appointed from the other side (V, 5988) or the position was left
    vacant (V, 5989). A Delegate could have been appointed teller (II,
    1302). Where there was doubt as to the count by tellers, the Chair could
    have ordered the vote taken again (V, 5991; July 19, 1946, p. 9466), but
    this must have been done before the result was announced (V, 5993-5995;
    VIII, 3098). The Chair could have been counted without passing between
    the tellers (V, 5996, 5997; VIII, 3100, 3101).

      (c) In case of a tie vote, a question shall be lost.

    [[Page 817]]

      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.
    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
    electronic system was first utilized in the House on January 23, 1973
    (p. 1793). Under paragraph (a), a record vote is conducted by electronic
    device unless the Speaker directs otherwise (Mar. 21, 2010, p. _).

      A provision regarding holding a vote open for the sole purpose of
    reversing its outcome was added in the 110th Congress (sec. 302, H. Res.
    6, Jan. 4, 2007, p. 19 (adopted Jan. 5, 2007)). A select committee to
    investigate certain voting irregularities recommended its repeal (H.
    Rept. 110-885), and the 111th Congress did so (sec. 2(h), H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 6, 2009, p. _). That provision did not establish a point of order
    (Apr. 15, 2008, p. _; May 8, 2008, p. _) but a vote could have been
    subject to collateral challenge as a question of the privileges of the
    House (Mar. 12, 2008, p. _; Apr. 15, 2008, p. _).

    [[Page 818]]

    call of the roll by the Clerk in lieu of utilizing 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
    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

      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) and the electronic voting system now is programmed to
    accommodate changes at the stations throughout any electronic vote of a
    minimum duration of less than 15 minutes. Once the Clerk has announced
    changes, the voting stations close and further changes must be made in
    the well (Nov. 17, 2005, p. 26580).

      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) or as a result of an untabulated voting card (Sept. 25, 2008,
    p. _).

    [[Page 819]]

    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, pp.
    32099, 32100; Dec. 8, 2005, pp. 27811, 27812). Similarly, resolutions
    directing the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct (now Ethics) to
    review irregularities in the conduct of a vote in the House (Aug. 3,
    2007, p. 22746) or alleging irregularities in the conduct of a vote,
    directing House officers to preserve all records relating thereto, and
    establishing a select committee of investigation thereof (Aug. 3, 2007,
    pp. 22768, 22769) constitute questions of the privileges of the House.
      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. 21558; Mar. 30, 2004, pp. 5577, 5578;
    July 8, 2004, pp. 14781 0983; July 9, 2004, p. 14972). 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. 9164; June 29, 2005, p. 14835). A
    resolution alleging intentional

      Where the Chair attempted to prematurely close a vote by electronic
    device while voting cards submitted in the well were still being
    tabulated, he allowed such tabulation to conclude before announcing the
    outcome of the vote (Aug. 2, 2007, p. 22545). The ``scoreboard''
    components of the electronic voting system are for display only, such
    that when the clock-setting on the board reads ``final'' the Chair may
    continue to allow Members in the well to cast votes or enter changes
    (Sept. 18, 2007, p. 24524).

      Because this clause is incorporated by reference into clause 6 of rule
    XVIII (formerly clause 2 of rule XXIII), the chair 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 may continue to exercise discretion under that clause
    at any time during the conduct of the call (July 17, 1974, p. 23673).

    [[Page 820]]

      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. 70; Speaker
    Pelosi, Jan. 5, 2007, p. 273; Speaker Pelosi, Jan. 6, 2009, p. _;
    Speaker Boehner, Jan. 5, 2011, 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).

    Sec. 1014a. Procedure when electronic voting system
    inoperable.

      (b) When  the electronic voting system is inoperable or is not
    used, the Speaker or Chair may direct the Clerk to conduct a record vote
    or quorum call as provided in clause 3 or 4.

      When the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this
    provision was added as a cross reference to the backup procedures found
    in clauses 3 and 4(a) and to clarify the Chair's discretion to choose
    either backup procedure (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). A gender-based
    reference was eliminated in the 111th Congress (sec. 2(l), H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 6, 2009, p. _).

    [[Page 821]]

    --  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 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. 15214). The determination that 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,
    pp. 21151, 21152). 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. 5262). 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). Although
    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).

    [[Page 822]]

      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 voting, the
    Speaker's 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, the Speaker 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 the Speaker may entertain a motion for
    correction of the Journal in accordance with the vote as finally
    ascertained (VIII, 3162).

      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 the Member qualified by declaring
    that the Member had been within the Hall, listening, when the name
    should have been called and failed to hear it (V, 6071-6072; VIII, 3144-
    3150), and then only on the theory that the name may have been
    inadvertently omitted by the Clerk (VIII, 3137). Under the former
    practice in which 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 a 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 a recapitulation of a vote taken by electronic device (Speaker
    Albert, July 30, 1975, p. 25841). The decision to conduct a record vote
    by call of the roll is entirely within the discretion of the Speaker,
    who may refuse to speculate whether he would exercise such discretion on
    a future vote (Mar. 21, 2010, p. _).

    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. 9274) to two-minute electronic votes, two bells were rung.

    [[Page 823]]

      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 in the Committee of the Whole to be followed immediately
    by possible two-minute vote under clauses 6(f) or 6(g) of rule XVIII--
    two bells rung at beginning of first vote, followed by two bells,
    indicate that Chair will order two-minute votes if recorded vote is
    ordered immediately thereafter. Two bells repeated five minutes after
    first ring. Two 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.

      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 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
    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.

      Adjournment--four bells and four lights on left.

      Any two-minute vote--two bells and two 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).

    [[Page 824]]

    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 a 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 cast 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 or her 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).

    Sec. 1018. Interruptions of the roll call.

      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. 46; Jan. 6, 2005, p. 242;
    Jan. 25, 2005, p. 749). 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 from announcing after
    a recorded vote how the Member 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).

    [[Page 825]]

    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.

    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

      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 has discretion to direct that the
    presence of Members be recorded by this procedure in lieu of using the
    electronic system, or the Chair may direct that a quorum call be taken
    by an alphabetical call of the roll (Mar. 7, 1973, p. 6699). The chair
    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).

      Exercising 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.

    [[Page 826]]

    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.

      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

    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.

      (b) Subject to clause 7(b) a majority described in paragraph (a) may
    order the Sergeant-at-Arms to send officers appointed by the Sergeant-
    at-Arms 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 to the
    Clerk to be entered on the Journal as present.

    [[Page 827]]

    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).
      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 chooses to recognize 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. A technical
    correction to paragraph (b) was effected in the 109th Congress (sec.
    2(l), H. Res. 5, Jan. 4, 2005, p. 44). A gender-based reference was
    eliminated in the 111th Congress (sec. 2(l), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, p.
    _). Before

    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).

      Although 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).

      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 ordered the arrest of those who are unexcused, a motion to
    excuse an absentee is in order when brought to the bar (IV, 3012).

    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 in which 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).

    [[Page 828]]

    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 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

      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 829]]

    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,
    consideration, 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 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. 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.

      (2) If a Representative counted in determining the provisional number
    of the House thereafter ceases to be a Representative, or if a
    Representative not counted in determining the provisional number of the
    House thereafter appears in the House, the provisional number of the
    House shall be adjusted accordingly.

      (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 paragraph (a) has been disposed of and without
    intervening adjournment, each of the following occurs in the stated
    sequence:

    [[Page 830]]

          (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 a 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.

      (4)(A) For purposes of subparagraph (3), a catastrophic quorum failure
    report is a report advising 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.

      (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.

    [[Page 831]]

          (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.

      (6) Subparagraph (1) does not apply to a proposal to create a vacancy
    in the representation from any State in respect of a Representative not
    incapacitated but otherwise incapable of attending the proceedings of
    the House.

      (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.

    [[Page 832]]

          (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. 43). It was amended in the 111th Congress to
    correct a cross-reference and to eliminate a gender-based reference
    (secs. 2(l), 2(m), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, 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 the Speaker deems pertinent.

      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. 43). A gender-based reference was
    eliminated in the 111th Congress (sec. 2(l), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, 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.

    [[Page 833]]

    under this clause shall be brought by
    the Sergeant-at-Arms before the House, whereupon the Member shall be
    noted as present, discharged from arrest, and given an opportunity to
    vote; and such 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.
      (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

      (c) At any time after Members have had the requisite opportunity to
    respond by the yeas and nays ordered under this clause, 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 the House adjourns on such a motion, all
    proceedings under this clause shall be considered as vacated.

      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). Paragraph (c) was amended to clarify the privileged nature of
    the motion to adjourn during the call in the 108th Congress (sec. 2(m),
    H. Res. 5, Jan. 7, 2003, p. 7) and the 111th Congress (sec. 2(m), H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, p. _), when gender-based references were also
    eliminated (sec. 2(l), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, p. _). Before the House
    recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, this provision was found in
    former clause 4 of rule XV (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

    [[Page 834]]

      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 direct the Clerk to call the
    roll pursuant to this clause (May 16, 1973, p. 15860).

      It applies only to votes in which 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; Aug. 4, 2007, p. 22990), 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). Although 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).

      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 the 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, because no business, including a
    unanimous-consent agreement, is in order in the announced absence of a
    quorum (July 13, 1983, p. 18844; Feb. 24, 1988, p. 2450). The House
    having authorized the Speaker to compel the attendance of absent
    Members, the Speaker announced that the Sergeant-at-Arms 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).

    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).

    [[Page 835]]

      The Sergeant-at-Arms is required to detain those who are present and
    bring in absentees (IV, 3045-3048), and 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.

    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
    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. 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.

    [[Page 836]]

    the House when a quorum appears unless the Speaker chooses to
    recognize 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).
      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

      Under this clause the Speaker may not entertain a point of order of no
    quorum when the Speaker 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 choose to recognize a Member 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.

      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, because 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 the
    Speaker has put the pending question to a vote (Oct. 28, 1987, p.
    29682).

    [[Page 837]]

    Postponement of proceedings
      In adopting this rule, the House has manifested a determination 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).

    1030. Postponing record votes on passage.

      8. (a)(1)  When a
    recorded vote is ordered, or the yeas and nays are ordered, or a vote is
    objected to under clause 6--

          (A) on any of the questions specified in subparagraph (2), the
    Speaker may postpone further proceedings to a designated place in the
    legislative schedule within two additional legislative days; and

          (B) on the question of agreeing to the Speaker's approval of the
    Journal, the Speaker may postpone further proceedings to a designated
    place in the legislative schedule on that legislative day.

      (2) The questions described in subparagraph (1) are as follows:

          (A) The question of passing a bill or joint resolution.

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

          (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).

    [[Page 838]]

          (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.

      (d) If the House adjourns on a legislative day designated for further
    proceedings on questions postponed under this clause without disposing
    of such questions, then on the next legislative day the unfinished
    business is the disposition of such questions.

    [[Page 839]]

    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. 43); (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);
    (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. 43). 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 has authorized
    the Speaker to postpone further proceedings on a specified class of
    record votes to a date certain beyond the two legislative days permitted
    under this clause (e.g., Sept. 17, 2003, p. 22272).
      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 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 the 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).

    [[Page 840]]

    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).
      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, because 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 the question will be put 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

      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, the Speaker 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 841]]

    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 reduce to not less than five minutes the time for taking
    votes on any or all of the subsequent motions on which votes have been
    postponed (June 4, 1974, p. 17547). Having clustered record votes on
    motions to suspend the rules and then having clustered record votes on
    passage of other measures considered immediately after debate on the
    suspension motions, the Speaker may, pursuant to this clause, conduct
    all the postponed votes in one sequence and reduce to five minutes the
    time for all electronic votes after the first suspension vote (May 17,
    1983, p. 12508; Oct. 2, 1989, p. 22724). However, the Chair may decline
    to recognize for a unanimous-consent request to reduce to five minutes
    the first vote in the series, because 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 entertain 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).
    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 (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

      For several years before the 107th Congress, special rules adopted by
    the House commonly provided the chair 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 chair
    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).

    Five-minute votes--
      Before the 106th Congress, pairs were not announced at a time other
    than that prescribed by the former rule (V, 6046), and the voting
    intentions of an absent Member were not otherwise announced by a
    colleague (VIII, 3151). Before the 94th Congress pairs were not
    permitted in Committee of the Whole (V, 5984; Speaker Albert, Jan. 15,
    1973, p. 1054). The House did not consider questions arising out of the
    breaking of a pair (V, 5982, 5983, 6095; VIII, 3082, 3085, 3087-3089,
    3093), or permit a Member to vote after the call on the plea that he had
    refrained because of misunderstanding as to a pair (V, 6080, 6081).
    Discussion of the origin of the practice 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.

    [[Page 842]]

    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).

      Five-minute votes are now permitted at the discretion of the Chair in
    the following circumstances: (1) under clause 9 on any question arising
    without intervening business after an electronic vote on another
    question if notice of possible five-minute voting was properly issued
    (which includes the authority also granted under clause 8(c)); (2) under
    clause 6(b)(3) of rule XVIII, on a pending question immediately
    following a regular quorum call in Committee of the Whole. Votes of not
    less than two minutes are now permitted at the discretion of the chair
    of the Committee of the Whole in the following circumstances: (1) 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;
    (2) 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 below the minimum if Members have not been
    given sufficient notice (e.g., July 14, 1999, p. 16008; June 23, 2004,
    p. 13734; Sept. 15, 2005, p. 20442; July 19, 2007, p. 19838). However,
    the Chair may entertain such a request when circumstances ensure
    sufficient notice (June 24, 2005, pp. 14220, 14232; June 15, 2007, pp.
    15971, 15999). The House has by unanimous consent authorized the Speaker
    to reduce to two minutes electronic votes conducted under this clause
    (e.g., July 23, 2007, p. 20108).

    [[Page 843]]

    ``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) and
    changes may now be made electronically on a vote of a minimum duration
    of less than 15 minutes. Once the Clerk has announced changes, the
    voting stations close and further changes must be made in the well (Nov.
    17, 2005, p. 26580).

    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

    1033. Yeas and nays ordered on certain questions.

      10.  The
    yeas and nays shall be considered as ordered when the Speaker puts the
    question on passage of a bill or joint resolution, or on adoption of a
    conference report, making general appropriations, or increasing Federal
    income tax rates (within the meaning of clause 5 of rule XXI), or on
    final adoption of a concurrent resolution on the budget or conference
    report thereon.

    Ballot votes
      This clause was adopted in the 104th Congress (sec. 214, H. Res. 6,
    Jan. 4, 1995, p. 468). Before the House recodified its rules in the
    106th Congress, this provision was found in former clause 7 of rule XV
    (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). The Chair announced the ordering of
    the yeas and nays under this clause on passage of a joint resolution not
    only further continuing appropriations for the current fiscal year but
    also enacting by reference six general appropriation bills (Oct. 21,
    2003, pp. 25314, 25315).

    [[Page 844]]

    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.

    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 reported in
    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.

    [[Page 845]]

    already in progress. This subparagraph does
    not apply to transfers of unexpended balances within the department or
    agency for which they were originally appropriated that are reported by
    the Committee on Appropriations.

    Sec. 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

    Sec. 1038. Legislation in reported general appropriation
    bills; exceptions.

      (b)  A provision changing existing law may not be
    reported in a general appropriation bill, including a provision making
    the availability of funds contingent on the receipt or possession of
    information not required by existing law for the period of the
    appropriation, except germane provisions that retrench expenditures by
    the reduction of amounts of money covered by the bill (which may include
    those recommended to the Committee on Appropriations by direction of a
    legislative committee having jurisdiction over the subject matter) and
    except rescissions of appropriations contained in appropriation Acts.

    [[Page 846]]

    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.

    Sec. 1041. Designated emergencies in reported
    appropriation bills.

      (e)  A provision other than an appropriation
    designated an emergency under section 251(b)(2) or section 252(e) of the
    Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act, a rescission of
    budget authority, or a reduction in direct spending or an amount for a
    designated emergency may not be reported in an appropriation bill or
    joint resolution containing an emergency designation under section
    251(b)(2) or section 252(e) of such Act and may not be in order as an
    amendment thereto.

    [[Page 847]]

    without increasing the
    levels of budget authority or outlays in the bill. When considered en
    bloc under this paragraph, such amendments may amend portions of the
    bill not yet read for amendment (following disposition of any points of
    order against such portions) and are not subject to a demand for
    division of the question in the House or in the Committee of the Whole.

    Sec. 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

    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 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).

      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.

    [[Page 848]]

    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 (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

      Paragraph (b) narrowed the ``Holman Rule'' exception from the
    prohibition against legislation to cover only retrenchments reducing
    amounts of money included in the bill as reported, and permitted
    legislative committees with proper jurisdiction to recommend such
    retrenchments to the Appropriations Committee for discretionary
    inclusion in the reported bill. The last exception in paragraph (b),
    permitting the inclusion of legislation rescinding appropriations in
    appropriation Acts, was added in the 99th Congress by the Balanced
    Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 (sec. 228(a), P.L. 99-
    177). The latter feature of the paragraph does not extend to a
    rescission of budget authority provided by a law other than an
    appropriation Act (see, Sec. 1052, infra). In the 105th Congress
    paragraph (b) was amended to treat as legislation a provision reported
    in a general appropriation bill that makes funding contingent on whether
    circumstances not made determinative by existing law are ``known'' (H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 7, 1997, p. 121).

      Paragraph (c) retained the prohibition against amendments changing
    existing law but permitted limitation amendments during the reading of
    the bill by paragraph only if specifically authorized by existing law
    for the period of the limitation. In the 105th Congress paragraph (c)
    was amended to treat as legislation an amendment to a general
    appropriation bill that makes funding contingent on whether
    circumstances not made determinative by existing law are ``known'' (H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 7, 1997, p. 121).

      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 a 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).

    [[Page 849]]

      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. 44).

    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 850]]

    the chair of the Committee of the Whole lacked
    authority to pass upon the question (Apr. 8, 1943, p. 3150, 3153).
      As all bills making or authorizing appropriations require
    consideration in Committee of the Whole, it follows that the enforcement
    of the rule must ordinarily occur during consideration in Committee of
    the Whole, where the Chair, in response to a point of order, may rule
    out any portion of the bill in conflict with the rule (IV, 3811; Sept.
    8, 1965, pp. 23140, 23182). Portions of the bill thus stricken are not
    reported back to the House. Before the adoption of clause 1 (formerly
    clause 8) in the 104th Congress (see Sec. 1035, supra), it was necessary
    that 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, because the initial
    reservation carried over to the subsequent filing (Mar. 1, 1983, p.
    3241). In an instance in which 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 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; Aug. 1, 2008, p. _).
    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; June 18, 2009, p. _); and such amendment is precluded whether
    the Committee of the Whole has risen and reported automatically pursuant
    to a special rule or, instead, by a motion at the end of the reading for
    amendment (June 22, 1995, p. 16844).

      Points of order against unauthorized appropriations or legislation on
    general appropriation bills may be made as to the whole or only a
    portion of a paragraph (IV, 3652; V, 6881). The fact that a point of
    order is made against a portion of a paragraph does not prevent another
    point of order against the whole paragraph (V, 6882; July 31, 1985, p.
    21895), nor does it prevent another Member from demanding that the
    original point of order be extended to the entire paragraph (e.g., July
    16, 1998, p. 15806; Sept. 4, 2003, pp. 21164, 21167, pp. 21169, 21170;
    Sept. 14, 2004, p. 18384; June 29, 2005, p. 14804). 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 order is
    sustained against the whole of a paragraph the whole must be stricken,
    but it is otherwise when the point of order is made only against a
    portion (V, 6884, 6885).

    [[Page 851]]

    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 22, 2003, p. 18984). Where a chapter
    is considered as read by unanimous consent and open to amendment at any
    point, no amendments are offered and the Clerk begins to read the next
    chapter, it is too late to make a point of order against a paragraph in
    the preceding chapter (June 11, 1985, p. 15181). It is too late to rule
    out the entire paragraph after points of order against specific portions
    have been sustained and an amendment to the paragraph has been offered
    (June 27, 1974, pp. 21670-72).
      General appropriation bills are read ``scientifically'' only by
    paragraph headings and appropriation amounts, and points of order
    against a paragraph must be made before an amendment is offered thereto
    or before the Clerk reads the next paragraph heading and amount
    (Deschler, ch. 26, Sec. 2.26). A point of order against a paragraph
    under this clause may be made only after that paragraph has been read by
    the Clerk, and not before its reading pending consideration of an
    amendment inserting language immediately prior thereto (June 6, 1985,
    pp. 14605, 14609). Where the reading of a paragraph of a general
    appropriation bill has been dispensed with by unanimous consent, the
    Chair inquires whether there are points of order against the paragraph
    before entertaining amendments or directing the Clerk to read further,
    but 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

      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. 1058, infra.

    Sec. 1044a. Points of order on general appropriation bills,
    deliberation of.

      To  resolve an ambiguity when ruling on a point of order,
    the Chair may: (1) examine legislative history established during debate
    on an amendment against which a point of order has been reserved (June
    14, 1978, p. 17651); (2) inquire after its author's intent (Oct. 29,
    1991, p. 28818); or (3) examine the accompanying report to determine the
    intent of the section (June 25, 2004, p. 14181).

    [[Page 852]]

    (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, pp. 19250-51, pp. 19251-53; 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, pp. 15193, 15194, p. _ and May 25, 2006, p. 9790,
    where the Chair sustained the point of order in part because the
    manager's averment that the amendment increased outlays went
    unchallenged); (4) if the language is susceptible to more than one
    interpretation, that it merits the construction that it does not violate
    the rule (Deschler, ch. 26, Sec. 22.26), although that burden may be met
    by a showing that only the requirements of existing law, and not any new
    requirements, are recited in the language (Sept. 23, 1993, p. 22206).
      In the administration of the rule, it is the practice that those
    upholding an item of appropriation should have the burden of showing the
    law authorizing it (IV, 3597; VII, 1179, 1233, 1276; June 23, 2000, p.
    12123). Thus, the burden of proving the authorization for appropriations
    carried in a bill, or that the language in the bill constitutes a valid
    limitation 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. 14181). 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, pp. 15858, 15859). 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);

      The mere recitation in an amendment that a determination is to be made
    pursuant to existing laws and regulations, absent a citation to the law
    imposing such responsibility, is not sufficient proof by the proponent
    of an amendment to overcome a point of order that the amendment
    constitutes legislation (Sept. 16, 1980, p. 25606).

      The Chair may overrule a point of order that appropriations for a
    certain agency are unauthorized upon citation to an organic statute
    creating the agency, absent any showing that the organic law has been
    overtaken by a scheme of periodic reauthorization; the Chair may hear
    further argument and reverse a ruling, however, where existing law not
    previously called to the Chair's attention would require the ruling to
    be reversed (VIII, 3435; June 8, 1983, p. 14854, where a law amending
    the statute creating the Bureau of the Mint with the express purpose of
    requiring annual authorizations was subsequently called to the Chair's
    attention). Reported provisions in a general appropriation bill
    described in the accompanying report as directly or indirectly changing
    the application of existing law are presumably legislation, absent
    rebuttal by the committee (May 31, 1984, p. 14591).

    [[Page 853]]

    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 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).

    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

      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. 8309). The 110th
    through 112th Congresses adopted the same procedure (sec. 511(a)(5), H.
    Res. 6, Jan. 4, 2007, p. 19 (adopted Jan. 5, 2007); sec. 3(a)(4), H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, p. _; sec. 3(a)(4), H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 2011, p.
    _), to wit:

      Sec. 3. (a)(4)(A) During the One Hundred Twelfth Congress, except as
    provided in subparagraph (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 subparagraph (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.

    [[Page 854]]

      (C) Subparagraph (A) shall not apply--

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

              (ii) after disposition of a question under subparagraph (B) on

            a given bill.

      (D) If a question under subparagraph (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 chair or ranking

            minority member of the Committee on Appropriations or their

            designees, for the purpose of debate.

    Sec. 1045. Authorization of law for
    appropriations.

      A treaty  may provide the authorization by existing law required
    in the rule to justify appropriations if it has been ratified by the
    contracting parties (IV, 3587); however, where existing law authorizes
    appropriations for the U.S. share of facilities to be recommended in an
    agreement with another country containing specified elements, an
    agreement in principle with that country predating the authorization law
    and lacking the required elements is insufficient authorization (June
    28, 1993, p. 14421). An Executive Order does not constitute sufficient
    authorization in law absent proof of its derivation from a statute
    enacted by Congress authorizing the order and expenditure of funds (June
    15, 1973, p. 19855; June 25, 1974, p. 21036). Thus a Reorganization Plan
    submitted by the President pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 906 has the status of
    statutory law when it becomes effective and is sufficient authorization
    to support an appropriation for an office created by Executive Order
    issued pursuant to the Reorganization Plan (June 21, 1974, p. 20595). A
    constitutional guarantee of just compensation for a governmental taking
    of private property for public use does not itself constitute sufficient
    authorization by law for appropriations in a general appropriation bill
    for compensation of particular private property owners (July 18, 2001,
    pp. 13662-65; cf. VII, 1144).

    [[Page 855]]

      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).

      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 (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. 18384; June 29, 2005, p. 14798) was held
    unauthorized where such funding was authorized only from the general
    fund. A paragraph providing funds for the President to meet
    ``unanticipated needs'' was held unauthorized (July 16, 1998, p. 15808).
    The authorization must be enacted before the appropriation may be
    included in an appropriation bill; thus delaying the availability of an
    appropriation pending enactment of an authorization does not protect the
    item of appropriation against a point of order under this clause (Apr.
    26, 1972, p. 14455). Similarly, an amendment limiting funds to the
    extent provided in authorizing legislation on or after the date of
    enactment of the pending appropriation bill is not in order (May 19,
    2005, pp. 10376, 10377).

    [[Page 856]]

    authorizations
    (June 14, 1978, pp. 17616, 17622, 17626, 17630) or on whether a periodic
    authorization scheme has subsequently occupied the field (Sept. 9, 1997,
    p. 18197). An authorization of ``such sums as may be necessary'' is
    sufficient to support any dollar amount, but has no tendency to relieve
    other conditions of the authorization law (June 28, 1993, p. 1442).
    Where existing law authorizes certain appropriations from a particular
    trust fund without fiscal year limitation, language that such an
    appropriation remain available until expended does not constitute
    legislation (July 15, 1993, p. 15848).
      The failure of Congress to enact into law separate legislation
    specifically modifying eligibility requirements for grant programs under
    existing law does not necessarily render appropriations for those
    programs subject to a point of order, where more general existing law
    authorizes appropriations for all of the programs proposed to be
    modified by new legislation pending before Congress (June 8, 1978, p.
    16778). However, whether organic statutes or general grants of authority
    in law constitute sufficient authorization to support appropriations
    depends on whether the general laws applicable to the function or
    department in question require specific or annual

      An amendment to a general appropriation bill providing that ``not less
    than'' (or ``not to exceed'') a certain amount be made available to a
    program requires an authorization (June 21, 1988, p. 15440; July 12,
    2000, p. 14070; July 13, 2000, p. 14084; July 25, 2007, pp. 20597,
    20598).

      Pursuant to clause 11(i) of rule X (formerly clause 9 of rule XLVIII),
    no funds may be appropriated to certain agencies carrying out
    intelligence and intelligence-related activities, unless such funds have
    been authorized by law for the fiscal year in question.

    Sec. 1046. Authorization for claims and
    salaries.

      Judgments of  courts certified to Congress in accordance with law or
    authorized by treaty (IV, 3634, 3635, 3644) and audited under authority
    of law have been held to be authorization for appropriations for the
    payment of claims (IV, 3634, 3635). However, unadjudicated claims (IV,
    3628), even though ascertained and transmitted by an executive officer
    (IV, 3625-3640), and findings filed under the Bowman Act do not
    constitute authorization (IV, 3643).

      An appropriation for an object not otherwise authorized does not
    constitute authorization to justify a continuance of the appropriation
    another year (IV, 3588, 3589; VII, 1128, 1145, 1149, 1191), and the mere
    appropriation for a salary does not create an office so as to justify
    appropriations in succeeding years (IV, 3590, 3672, 3697), it being a
    general rule that propositions to appropriate for salaries not
    established by law or to increase salaries fixed by law are out of order
    (IV, 3664-3667, 3676-3679). An exception to these general principles is
    found in the established practice that in the absence of a general law
    fixing a salary the amount appropriated in the last appropriation bill
    has been held to be the legal salary (IV, 3687-3696). A law having
    established an office and fixed a salary, it is not in order to provide
    for an unauthorized office and salary in lieu of it (IV, 3680).

    [[Page 857]]

    does not fix a limit of cost such as would
    exclude future appropriations (IV, 3761). A declaration of policy in an
    act followed by specific provisions conferring authority upon a
    governmental agency to perform certain functions was construed not to
    authorize appropriations for purposes germane to the policy but not
    specifically authorized by the act (VII, 1200). A point of order will
    not lie against an amendment proposing to increase a lump sum for public
    works projects where language in the bill limits use of the lump sum
    appropriation to projects as authorized by law (Deschler, ch. 26,
    Sec. 19.6), but where language in the bill limits use of the lump sum
    both to projects ``authorized by law'' and ``subject, where appropriate,
    to enactment of authorizing legislation,'' that paragraph constitutes an
    appropriation in part for some unauthorized projects and is not in order
    (June 6, 1985, p. 14617). Language in an appropriation bill precluding
    funds for projects not authorized by law or beyond the amount authorized
    was held to limit expenditures to authorized projects and was not
    legislation (Deschler, ch. 25, Sec. 2.18).

    Sec. 1047. Authorizations for public works.

      An  appropriation
    for a public work in excess of a fixed limit of cost (IV, 3583, 3584;
    VII, 1133), or for extending a service beyond the limits assigned by an
    executive officer exercising a lawful discretion (IV, 3598), or by
    actual law (IV, 3582, 3585), or for purposes prohibited by law are out
    of order (IV, 3580, 3581, 3702), as is an appropriation from the Highway
    Trust Fund where the project is specifically authorized from the general
    fund (Sept. 23, 1993, p. 22175). However, the mere appropriation of a
    sum to complete a work

    [[Page 858]]

    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. 3307)
    specifically prohibits the making of an appropriation to construct or
    alter any public building involving more than a certain amount of money
    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, because
    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

    [[Page 859]]

    Sec. 1049. Examples illustrating the continuation of
    a public work.

      Thus the  continuation of the following works has been admitted:
    a topographical survey (IV, 3796, 3797; VII, 1382), a geological map
    (IV, 3795), marking of a boundary line (IV, 3717), marking graves of
    soldiers (IV, 3788), a list of claims (IV, 3717), and recoinage of coins
    in the Treasury (IV, 3807); but the following works have not been
    admitted: investigation of materials, like coal (IV, 3721), scientific
    investigations (IV, 3719; VII, 1345), duties of a commission (IV, 3720;
    VII, 1344), extension of foreign markets for goods (IV, 3722), printing
    of a series of opinions indefinite in continuance (IV, 3718), free
    evening lectures in the District of Columbia (IV, 3789), certain ongoing
    projects from the Highway Trust Fund (Sept. 22, 1993, pp. 22140; Sept.
    23, 1993, p. 22173), extension of an existing road (Sept. 22, 1993, p.
    22140), continuation of an extra compensation for ordinary facility for
    carrying the mails (IV, 3808), although the continuation of certain
    special mail facilities has been admitted (IV, 3804-3806). However,
    appropriations for rent and repairs of buildings or Government roads
    (IV, 3793, 3798) and bridges (IV, 3803) have been admitted as in
    continuation of a work (IV, 3777, 3778), although it is not in order as
    such to provide for a new building in place of one destroyed (IV, 3606).
    It is not in order to repair paving adjacent to a public building but in
    a city street, although it may have been laid originally by the
    Government (IV, 3779). The purchase of adjoining land for a work already
    established has been admitted under this principle (IV, 3766-3773) as
    have additions to existing buildings in cases in which 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. 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). Although appropriations for new construction and procurement of
    aircraft and equipment for the Navy are not in order, appropriations for
    continuing experiments and development work on all types of aircraft are
    in order (Jan. 22, 1926, p. 2623). This former interpretation was
    confined to naval vessels, and did not apply to vessels in other
    services, like the Coast and Geodetic Survey or Lighthouse Service (IV,
    3725, 3726), or to floating or stationary drydocks (IV, 3729-3736). The
    construction of a submarine cable in extension of one already laid was
    held not to be the continuation of a public work (IV, 3716), but an
    appropriation for the Washington-Alaska military cable has been held in
    order (VII, 1348).

    Sec. 1052. Legislation generally.

      A  provision changing
    existing law is construed to mean the enactment of law where none exists
    (IV, 3812, 3813). For example, the following provisions have been held
    out of order: (1) permitting funds to remain available until expended or
    beyond the fiscal year covered by the bill where existing law does not
    permit such availability (Aug. 1, 1973, p. 27288; June 9, 2006, p.
    10671); (2) permitting funds to be available immediately upon enactment
    before the fiscal year covered by the bill (July 29, 1986, p. 17981;
    June 28, 1988, p. 16255); (3) permitting funds to be available to the
    extent provided in advance in appropriation Acts but not explicitly
    beyond the fiscal year in question (July 21, 1981, p. 16687); (4)
    setting a floor on spending that is not established by existing law
    (July 23, 2003, pp. 19228, 19229); (5) establishing a legislative
    formula for funding (Feb. 18, 2011, p. _).

    [[Page 860]]

    15353; July 29, 1998, p. 17956) or a loan
    guarantee program (July 13, 2004, pp. 15212, 15213). Similarly, a
    provision canceling funds under the Farm Security and Rural Investment
    Act of 2002 was held to be legislation (June 16, 2004, p. 12554). 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).
      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. 11326; Mar.
    24, 2010, p. _), 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.

      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, pp. 24962, 24963; Mar.
    15, 2005, pp. 4700 0902 (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, pp. 10376, 10377).

      Although the object to be appropriated for may be described without
    violating the rule (IV, 3864), an amendment proposing an appropriation
    under a heading that indicates an unauthorized purpose as its object has
    been ruled out (Oct. 29, 1991, p. 28814). For example, an amendment
    proposing to make certain funds available for a specified report not
    contemplated by existing law was held to constitute legislation in
    violation of clause 2(c) (June 13, 2000, p. 10509). The fact that a
    legislative item has been carried in appropriation bills for many years
    does not exempt it from a point of order (VII, 1445, 1656). The
    reenactment from year to year of a law intended to apply during the year
    of its enactment only is not relieved, however, from the point that it
    is legislation (IV, 3822). Limits of cost for public works may not be
    made or changed (IV, 3761, 3865-3867; VII, 1446), nor contracts
    authorized (IV, 3868-3870; May 14, 1937, p. 4595).

    [[Page 861]]

    as does one establishing a select committee
    (Mar. 16, 2006, pp. 3793, 3794) or a trust fund in the Treasury (June 9,
    2006, p. 10680). An amendment proposed in a motion to recommit
    incorporating by reference amendments that changed existing law
    constitutes legislation (July 24, 2009, p. _).

      An amendment to a general appropriation bill stating a legislative
    position constitutes legislation (July 24, 2001, pp. 14349, 14351; July
    9, 2009, p. _ (sustained by tabling of appeal), p. _ (sustained by
    tabling of appeal))

    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. 19238).

      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 although 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 862]]

    to responsible intervening Federal officials) was held to
    be a proper limitation (July 18, 2001, pp. 13683, 13684).
      A limitation may place some minimal, incidental duties on Federal
    officials, who must determine the effect of such a limitation on
    appropriated funds. However, a provision may not impose additional
    duties not required by law, either explicitly or implicitly, or make the
    appropriation contingent upon the performance of such duties (VII, 1676;
    June 11, 1968, p. 16712; July 31, 1969, pp. 21631-33; May 28, 1968, p.
    15350; July 26, 1985, p. 20807; see Sec. 1054, infra). The fact that a
    limitation may indirectly interfere with an executive official's
    discretionary authority by denying the use of funds (June 24, 1976, p.
    20408) or may impose certain incidental burdens on executive officials
    (Aug. 25, 1976, p. 27737) does not destroy the character of the
    limitation as long as it does not otherwise amend existing law and is
    descriptive of functions and findings already required to be undertaken
    by existing law. For example, a limitation precluding funds for
    specified Federal departments to file certain motions in specified civil
    actions (all matters of public record in the litigation and therefore
    available

      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, pp. 15838, 15839). 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,
    22007).

    [[Page 863]]

    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, pp.
    19250-51); (3) an amendment to limit funds to prohibit the establishment
    of an independent commission not contemplated by existing law (July 23,
    2003, pp. 19251-53).
      The Chair has stated that a limitation amendment that comprises a
    textual ``double-negative'' (the coupling of a denial of an
    appropriation with a negative restriction on official duties) is suspect
    and may result in an affirmative direction or an affirmative statement
    of intent that constitutes legislation and is therefore not in order
    (VII, 1690-1692; Deschler, ch. 26, Sec. 51.15 (note); July 23, 2003, pp.
    19250-53). 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, pp. 19250-51, pp. 19251-53). 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

      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).

      Although the Committee on Appropriations may include in a general
    appropriation bill language not in existing law limiting the use of
    funds in the bill, if such language also constitutes an appropriation it
    must be authorized by law (June 21, 1988, p. 15439). An amendment
    placing a limitation on funds for activities unrelated to the functions
    of departments and agencies addressed by the bill is not germane under
    clause 7 of rule XVI (July 10, 2000, p. 13605).

    [[Page 864]]

    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.

    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 in which they may have discretion under the law so
    to do (IV, 3853; June

    [[Page 865]]

    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, pp. 21548, 21549); (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, pp. 15860, 15861); (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, pp. 18628-31); (35) require a determination that certain
    trade agreements achieved generic undefined policy goals that were not
    set forth in existing law (July 23, 2003, pp. 19156-58); (36) require a
    determination that a drug has been prescribed ``for the purpose of
    relieving or managing pain'' (July 7, 2004, pp. 14679, 14682); (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, pp.
    10364, 10365); (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, pp. 11945, 11946) or require
    the administrator of the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program to
    determine whether a federal

    [[Page 866]]

    prohibition on certain mineral
    exploration (administered by a different federal entity) remained in
    effect (Mar. 15, 2006, p. 3722); (39) require a determination regarding
    a specific type of employment behavior before initiating an employment
    investigation (June 8, 2005, pp. 11948-50); (40) require a determination
    as to whether a local educational agency had obtained parental consent
    before providing military recruiters student information (June 24, 2005,
    pp. 14185, 14186); (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, pp. 14891-
    93); (42) prescribe a policy for an agency in the distribution of grants
    (June 6, 2006, pp. 10105, 10106); (43) require a determination of
    citizenship based on birth (June 6, 2006, pp. 10108, 10109); (44)
    require a determination of what activities tend to ``continue''
    specified litigation (Feb. 18, 2011, p. _).
      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 relation to ``overhead'' (Deschler, ch. 26,
    Sec. 5.6; June 24, 1992, p. 16110); (19) require an agency to
    investigate and determine whether private airports are collecting
    certain fees for each enplaning passenger (Sept. 23, 1993, p. 22213);
    (20) require an agency to investigate and determine whether a person or
    entity entering into a contract with funds under the pending bill is
    subject to a legal proceeding commenced by the Federal Government and
    alleging fraud (Sept. 17, 1997, p. 19045); (21) require an agency to
    determine whether building services are ``usually'' provided through the

      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).

    [[Page 867]]

    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) or for the plan,
    design, study, or construction of roads in a specified forest for the
    purpose of private timber harvest (June 26, 2007, p. 17521 0923) unless
    also requiring a determination of the date a given road project
    commenced (May 19, 2005, pp. 10364, 10365); (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, pp. 9993, 9994; June 6,
    2006, pp. 10106, 10107).
      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 such
    official is charged with enforcing (Sept. 10, 1981, p. 20110); (3)
    reducing the availability of funds for trade adjustment assistance by
    amounts of unemployment insurance entitlements where the law
    establishing trade adjustment assistance already required the disbursing
    agency to take into consideration levels of unemployment insurance in
    determining payment levels (June 18, 1980, p. 15355); (4) denying the
    use of funds to carry out (or pay the salaries of persons who carry out)
    tobacco crop and insurance programs (July 20, 1995, p. 19798); (5)
    denying the use of funds for any transit project exceeding a specified
    cost-effectiveness index where the Chair was persuaded that the
    limitation applied to projects for which indexes were already required
    by law (Sept. 23, 1993, p. 22206); (6) denying the use of funds to
    enforce FAA regulations to require domestic air carriers to surrender
    more than a specified number of ``slots'' at a given airport in
    preference of international air carriers where the Chair was persuaded
    that existing regulations already required the FAA to determine the
    origin of withdrawn slots (Sept. 23, 1993, p. 22212); (7) denying the
    use of funds for troops ``except in time of war'' (Deschler, ch. 26,
    Sec. 70.1) or ``except in time of emergency'' (VII, 1657, which was the
    basis for the preceding ruling); (8) denying the use of funds to
    implement any sanction imposed by the United States on private
    commercial sales of agricultural commodities, medicine, or medical
    supplies to Cuba except

    [[Page 868]]

    all appropriations for the annual
    Federal payment and for disbursement of all taxes collected by the
    District of Columbia, pursuant to the D.C. Code (July 17, 1979, p.
    19066).
      A paragraph prohibiting the use of funds to perform abortions except
    where the mother's life would be endangered if the fetus were carried to
    term (or where the pregnancy was a result of rape or incest) is
    legislation, because 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; July 16, 2009, p. _).
    However, to such a provision permitted to remain in a general
    appropriation bill, an amendment ``merely perfecting'' the exemption to
    address cases in which 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, because Federal officials have
    the responsibility to account for

      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
    because 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 869]]

    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 30, 1980, p. 20475), or contingent upon
    submission of an agreement by a Federal official to Congress and
    congressional review thereof (July 31, 1986, p. 18370). Similarly, it is
    not in order to condition

      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. 3713); 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. 21548); (6)
    compliance with a law not otherwise applicable (Sept. 4, 2003, p.
    21213).

    [[Page 870]]

    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 the
    renter 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 871]]

    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, pp. 3786 0988
    (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. 9, 2004, pp. 17853, 17854).

      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. 15831 (sustained on
    appeal); July 10, 2003, p. 17535, p. 17576).

    [[Page 872]]

    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, because 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. 10673)), 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; June 26, 2007, pp. 17485, 17486), 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 873]]

    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, p. 14746; Sept. 17, 1998, p. 20818; June 27, 2007,
    pp. 17715, 17716). 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 because 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).

      The following amendments to legislative provisions permitted to remain
    have been held to propose additional legislation: (1) adding another
    class to those on which assistance is conferred (June 22, 1983, p.
    16851); (2) striking text that resulted in extending the legislative
    reach of the pending bill (July 17, 1996, p. 17533); (3) 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); (4) adding an additional nation to a legislative
    provision addressing sanctions against one nation (July 13, 2000, p.
    14092); (5) extending the availability of certain housing assistance to
    certain recipients (June 13, 2006, pp. 11041, 11042); (6) specifying a
    different regulation required to be reissued by an agency (Feb. 16,
    2011, p. _); (7) adding a rule of construction regarding the
    implementation of a provision of law (as opposed to merely excepting
    that provision from the coverage of a legislative limitation on funds)
    (Feb. 16, 2011, p. _).

    [[Page 874]]

    gered if the fetus were carried to term was held not
    to constitute further legislation, because determinations on the
    endangerment of life necessarily subsume determinations on the
    endangerment of health; and the amendment did not therefore require any
    different or more onerous determinations (June 27, 1984, p. 19113).
      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 in which the life of
    the mother would be endangered if a fetus were carried to term, an
    amendment excepting instead cases in which the health of the mother
    would be endan

      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

    [[Page 875]]

    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 in which 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).

      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, because 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 because not specifically requiring a new determination and because
    constituting a retrenchment of expenditures even if assumed to be
    legislative (July 13, 1979, pp. 18453-55).

    [[Page 876]]

    trenching expenditures by formula for every
    agency funded by the bill, an amendment exempting from that reduction
    several specific programs does not add further legislation and is in
    order (July 30, 1980, pp. 20499-20503).
      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 re

      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, because 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 877]]

    an additional expenditure, the Chair will not speculate as
    to a possible expenditure under the additional legislation (VII, 1500).
      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

      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 878]]

    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 year available for certain new
    purposes was held out of order under clause 2(a)(2) because 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

      This rule, however, is not applicable when the reappropriation
    language is identical to legislative authorization language enacted
    subsequent to the adoption of the rule, because 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, pp. 10681, 10682). However, direct transfers of appropriations
    within the confines of the same bill normally are considered in order
    (VII, 1468) as a ``within-bill'' transfer rather than a transfer of
    unexpended balances of the kind addressed by clause 2(a)(2).

    [[Page 879]]

    Act
    of 1974 (Feb. 15, 2011, p. _), and an amendment to such bill proposing
    such a transfer was ruled out as impermissibly addressing portions of
    the bill not yet read (Feb. 15, 2011, p. _).

    Sec. 1063a. Offsetting en bloc amendments.

      To  invoke the
    protection of clause 2(f), an amendment must not (1) propose a change
    other than a transfer of appropriations among objects in the bill, such
    as increasing the amount of a deferral (June 15, 2000, p. 11064) or
    rescission (Feb. 16, 2011, p. _) or reaching back in the reading (Feb.
    15, 2011, p. _); or (2) 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. 15193, 15194, pp. 15198, 15199), 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. 9975).
    On one occasion, the House adopted an order rendering clause 2(f)
    unavailable during consideration of a bill in the case of an amendment
    transferring appropriations among objects falling within more than one
    suballocation under section 302(b) of the Congressional Budget

    (j) Spending Reduction Amendments in Appropriations Bills.

    Sec. 1063b. Spending reduction account.

      The  112th Congress
    (sec. 3(j), H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 2011, p. _) established (1) a procedure
    for reducing an amount in a general appropriation bill and displaying
    that reduction in a spending reduction account in the bill, and (2) a
    point of order against an amendment increasing the level of budget
    authority in a general appropriation bill, as follows:

              (1) During the reading of a general 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 from an object or

            objects in the bill to a spending reduction account. When

            considered en bloc under this clause, 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.

              (2) Except as provided in paragraph (1), it shall not be in

            order to consider an amendment to a spending reduction account

            in the House or in the Committee of the Whole House on the state

            of the Union.

              (3) It shall not be in order to consider an amendment to a

            general appropriation bill proposing a net increase in budget

            authority in the bill (unless considered en bloc with another

            amendment or amendments proposing an equal or greater decrease

            in such budget authority pursuant to clause 2(f) of rule XXI).

              (4) A point of order under clause 2(b) of rule XXI shall not

            apply to a spending reduction account.

              (5) A general appropriation bill may not be considered in the

            Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union unless it

            includes a spending reduction account as the last section of the

            bill. An order to report a general appropriation bill to the

            House shall constitute authority for the chair of the Committee

            on Appropriations to add such a section to the bill or modify

            the figure contained therein.

              (6) For purposes of this subsection, the term ``spending

            reduction account'' means an account in a general appropriation

            bill that bears that caption and contains only a recitation of

            the amount by which an applicable allocation of new budget

            authority under section 302(b) of the Congressional Budget Act

            of 1974 exceeds the amount of new budget authority proposed by

            the bill.

    [[Page 880]]

    increase in budget authority in the bill under section 3(j)(3)
    (e.g., Feb. 15, 2011, p. _; Apr. 7, 2011, p. _ (sustained by tabling of
    appeal)). An amendment to a general appropriation bill proposing a
    limitation on funds in the bill for the instant fiscal year was held not
    to propose a net increase in budget authority within the meaning of this
    provision (Feb. 18, 2011, p. _).

      The Chair is persuasively guided by an estimate from the chair of the
    Committee on the Budget as to whether an amendment proposes a net

    Sec. 1064. Highway funding.

      3.  It shall not be in order to
    consider a general appropriation bill or joint resolution, or conference
    report thereon, that--

          (a) provides spending authority derived from receipts deposited in
    the Highway Trust Fund (excluding any transfers from the General Fund of
    the Treasury); or

          (b) reduces or otherwise limits the accruing balances of the
    Highway Trust Fund,
    for any purpose other than for those activities authorized for the
    highway or mass transit categories.

      This clause was rewritten entirely in the 112th Congress (sec.
    2(d)(4), H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 2011, p. _). For its predecessor, which
    enforced specified minimum levels of surface transportation obligation
    limitations, see Sec. 1064 of the House Rules and Manual for the 111th
    Congress (H. Doc. 110-162).

    Sec. 48114. Funding for Aviation Programs.

    Sec. 1064d. 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

    [[Page 881]]

                    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).

                      (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

    [[Page 882]]

            for Facilities and Equipment for such fiscal year.

    Appropriations on legislative bills
      The chairs 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).

    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 during pendency of that measure for amendment.

      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).

    [[Page 883]]

    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, because the amendment is not separately before the House
    during consideration of the special order (Feb. 24, 1993, p. 3542).
      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 because 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,

      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, because the only
    rule prohibiting such inclusion (clause 5 of rule XXII) is limited to
    language originally contained in a Senate amendment where the House
    conferees have not been specifically authorized to agree thereto (May 1,
    1975, p. 12752). Where the House has adopted a resolution waiving points
    of order against certain appropriations in a legislative bill, a point
    of order may nevertheless be raised against an amendment to the bill
    containing an identical provision, because 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 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).

    [[Page 884]]

    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).
      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, because 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

      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).

    [[Page 885]]

    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.

    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
    chair 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

    [[Page 886]]

    diction. Most of the questions of order arising
            that juris

            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

            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 887]]

    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. 21531); (2) a limitation on funds to process the
    importation of any product from Iran (June 18, 2004, pp. 13041, 13042);
    (3) a limitation on funds 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. 12958).
      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

      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 888]]

    p. 17563); and (2) where a provision
    in a general appropriation bill prohibited the use of funds to impose or
    assess certain taxes due under specified portions of the Internal
    Revenue Code (July 13, 1990, p. 17473). In the 98th Congress, the Chair
    sustained points of order under this paragraph against motions to concur
    in three Senate amendments to a general appropriation bill (not reported
    by the Committee on Ways and Means): (1) an amendment denying the use of
    funds in that or any other Act by the IRS to impose or assess any tax
    due under a designated provision of the Internal Revenue Code, thereby
    rendering the tax uncollectable through the use of any funds available
    to the agency (Sept. 12, 1984, p. 25108); (2) an amendment directing the
    Secretary of the Treasury to admit free of duty certain articles
    imported by a designated organization (Sept. 12, 1984, p. 25109); and
    (3) an amendment to the Tariff Act of 1930 to expand the authority of
    the Customs Service to seize and use the proceeds from the sale of
    contraband imports to defray operational expenses, and to offset owed
    customs duties under one section of that law (Sept. 12, 1984, p. 25120).
    An amendment to a general appropriation bill proposing to divert an
    increase in funding for the IRS from spot-checks to targeted audits was
    held not to constitute a tax within the meaning of this paragraph
    because it did not necessarily affect revenue collection levels or tax
    liabilities (June 18, 1991, p. 15189).
      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,

    [[Page 889]]

      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).

    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 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, 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, p. 17535, p.
    17576).

    [[Page 890]]

    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.

    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

    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 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, pp. 1621, 1622
    (sustained by tabling of appeal); Mar. 3, 2011, p. _). 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).

    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--

    [[Page 891]]

    (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
          (1) the term ``Federal income tax rate increase'' means any
    amendment to subsection

          (2) a Federal income tax rate increase is retroactive if it
    applies to a period beginning before the enactment of the provision.

    Designation of public works
      This paragraph was added in the 104th Congress (sec. 106(b), H. Res.
    6, Jan. 4, 1995, p. 463), and it was amended in the 105th Congress to
    clarify the definition of ``Federal income tax rate increase'' (H. Res.
    5, Jan. 7, 1997, p. 121). Before the House recodified its rules in the
    106th Congress, this provision was found in former clause 5(d) of rule
    XXI (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

    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.

     end segment .011   <> 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 such
    that the reconciliation legislation reported pursuant to such directives
    would cause an increase in net direct spending

    [[Page 892]]

    (as such term is
    defined in clause 10) for the period covered by such concurrent
    resolution.

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

      This clause was added in the 110th Congress (sec. 402, H. Res. 6, Jan.
    4, 2007, p. 19 (adopted Jan. 5, 2007)), amended in the 111th Congress to
    reflect a change in the time periods in clause 10(a)(1) (sec. 2(j), H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, p. _), and rewritten in the 112th Congress to
    focus on an increase in direct spending instead of a reduction in the
    surplus or an increase in the deficit (sec. 2(d)(5), H. Res. 5, Jan. 5,
    2011, p. _).

    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. 6, Jan.
    4, 2007, p. 19 (adopted Jan. 5, 2007)).

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

    [[Page 893]]

    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;

    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

          (2) a bill or joint resolution not reported by a committee unless
    the chair 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;

    [[Page 894]]

    sional earmarks,
    limited tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits to be printed in the
    Congressional Record prior to its consideration; or
          (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 congres

          (4) a conference report to accompany a bill or joint resolution
    unless the joint explanatory statement prepared by the managers on the
    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.

      (b) It shall not be in order to consider a conference report to
    accompany a regular general appropriation bill unless the joint
    explanatory statement prepared by the managers on the part of the House
    and the managers on the part of the Senate includes--

    [[Page 895]]

    report of a committee of either House on such bill or on a
    companion measure; or
          (1) 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) that were neither
    committed to the conference committee by either House nor in a

          (2) a statement that the proposition contains no such
    congressional earmarks, limited tax benefits, or limited tariff
    benefits.

      (c) It shall not be in order to consider a rule or order that waives
    the application of paragraph (a) or (b). As disposition of a point of
    order under this paragraph or paragraph (b), the Chair shall put the
    question of consideration with respect to the rule or order or
    conference report, as applicable. 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.

      (d) 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.

    [[Page 896]]

    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 ``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

      (f) 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.

      (g) 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. 19 (adopted Jan. 5, 2007)), a similar point of order having
    operated during part of the 109th Congress (H. Res. 1000, Sept. 14,
    2006, p. 18316). Paragraph (b) was added in the 111th Congress (and
    subsequent paragraphs redesignated) (sec. 2(i), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009,
    p. _), a similar point of order having operated during part of the 110th
    Congress (H. Res. 491, June 18, 2007, p. 16163). A clarifying change to
    paragraph (b)(2) was made during the 111th Congress (sec. 2, H. Res.
    544, June 16, 2009, p. _). A gender-based reference was eliminated in
    the 111th Congress (sec. 2(l), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, p. _).

    [[Page 897]]

    in the Record a statement that the measure contains no
    congressional earmarks, limited tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits
    (Jan. 31, 2007, pp. 2737, 2738 (sustained by tabling of appeal)), or
    against a reported measure where the committee report contains such a
    statement (May 10, 2007, pp. 12190, 12191; May 23, 2007, p. 13686).
    Paragraph (d) 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. 12191). A point of order under this clause
    is untimely after consideration has begun (Mar. 23, 2007, pp. 7420,
    7423). Because paragraph (a) does not apply to a Senate amendment or an
    amendment considered as adopted pursuant to a special order of business,
    a rule waiving all points of order against a motion to dispose of a
    Senate amendment (Sept. 25, 2007, p. 25434 (sustained by tabling of
    appeal)) or a rule effecting a ``self-executing'' amendment (Sept. 27,
    2007, p. 25723)) has no tendency to waive the applicability of paragraph
    (a) within the meaning of paragraph (c). After a point of order under
    paragraph (a)(1) is sustained against consideration of a bill, a
    committee may file a supplemental report pursuant to clause 3(a)(2) of
    rule XIII to correct a technical error in the depiction of a bill number
    in the portion of a committee report regarding disclosure under this
    clause (July 30, 2010, p. _).
      A point of order under this clause does not lie against an unreported
    measure where the chair of the committee of initial referral has printed

    ---   <> 10. (a)(1) Except
    as provided in paragraphs (b) and (c), it shall not be in order to
    consider a bill or joint resolution, or an amendment thereto or a
    conference report thereon, if the provisions of such measure have the
    net effect of increasing mandatory spending for the period of either--
      Debate on the point of order is on the question of considering the
    measure that is the subject of the point of order (May 14, 2008, _). A
    point of order under both this clause and section 426 of the
    Congressional Budget Act, respectively, may be raised against a special
    order of business (May 14, 2008, p. _). A manager of a measure who
    controls time for debate against the point of order that is to be
    resolved by a question of consideration is entitled to close debate (Mar
    21, 2010, p. _).

          (A) the current year, the budget year, and the four fiscal years
    following that budget year; or

    [[Page 898]]

          (B) the current year, the budget year, and the nine fiscal years
    following that budget year.

      (2) For the purpose of this clause, the terms ``budget year'' and
    ``current year'' have the meanings specified in section 250 of the
    Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985, and the term
    ``mandatory spending'' has the meaning of ``direct spending'' specified
    in such section 250 except that such term shall also include provisions
    in appropriation Acts that make outyear modifications to substantive law
    as described in section 3(4)(C) of the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of
    2010.

      (b) If a bill or joint resolution, or an amendment thereto, is
    considered pursuant to a special order of the House directing the Clerk
    to add as new matter at the end of such bill or joint resolution the
    entire text of a separate measure or measures as passed by the House,
    the new matter proposed to be added shall be included in the evaluation
    under paragraph (a) of the bill, joint resolution, or amendment.

      (c)(1) Except as provided in subparagraph (2), the evaluation under
    paragraph (a) shall exclude a provision expressly designated as an
    emergency for the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010, in the case of a
    point of order under this clause against consideration of--

          (A) a bill or joint resolution;

          (B) an amendment made in order as original text by a special order
    of business;

          (C) a conference report; or

          (D) an amendment between the Houses.

    [[Page 899]]

    joint resolution, the evaluation
    under paragraph (a) shall give no cognizance to any designation of
    emergency.

      (2) In the case of an amendment (other than one specified in
    subparagraph (1)) to a bill or

    -  For the <> 112th
    Congress, the House (in sec. 3(g) of H. Res. 5) established a point of
    order against consideration of a measure increasing mandatory spending
    above a certain threshold over certain periods as follows:

      Clause 10 was added in the 110th Congress (sec. 405, H. Res. 6, Jan.
    4, 2007, p. 19 (adopted Jan. 5, 2007)) and amended in the 111th Congress
    (sec. 2(j), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, p. _; sec. 5, H. Res. 1500, July 1,
    2010, p. _). In its original form it addressed increases in the deficit
    or surplus caused by changes in revenue and direct spending. It was
    changed to its present form in the 112th Congress (sec. 2(d), H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 5, 2011, p. _). The Chair is authoritatively guided by estimates
    from the chair of the Committee on the Budget whether the net effect of
    an amendment increases mandatory spending as compared to the proposition
    to which offered (e.g., Jan. 26, 2011, p. _; Mar. 3, 2011, p. _
    (sustained by tabling of appeal); Mar. 10, 2011, p. _; Mar. 11, 2011, p.
    _). A point of order against a bill under this clause is not timely
    pending the question of engrossment and third reading (Mar. 30, 2011, p.
    _).

      (g) Limitation on Long-term Spending.--

              (1) It shall not be in order to consider a bill or joint

            resolution reported by a committee (other than the Committee on

            Appropriations), or an amendment thereto or a conference report

            thereon, if the provisions of such measure have the net effect

            of increasing mandatory spending in excess of $5,000,000,000 for

            any period described in paragraph (2).

              (2)(A) The applicable periods for purposes of this clause are

            any of the first four consecutive 10-fiscal-year periods

            beginning with the first fiscal year following the last fiscal

            year for which the applicable concurrent resolution on the

            budget sets forth appropriate budgetary levels.

              (2)(B) In this paragraph, the applicable concurrent resolution

            on the budget is the one most recently adopted before the date

            on which a committee first reported the bill or joint resolution

    ---  Under the <> former clause 10, the Chair was authoritatively guided by
    estimates from the Committee on the Budget as to the net effect of a
    provision on the relevant surplus or deficit (Dec. 12, 2007, p. _).
    Spending provided by appropriation acts did not constitute ``direct
    spending'' (May 15, 2008, p. _). For a complete recitation of precedents
    under the former clause, see Sec. 1068e of the House Rules and Manual
    for the 111th Congress (H. Doc. 110-162).

    [[Page 900]]

            described in paragraph (a).

    Sec. 1068i. Availability of introduced measures.

        11.
    It shall not be in order to consider a bill or joint resolution which
    has not been 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 such measure has been available to
    Members, Delegates, and the Resident Commissioner.

     segment .012 -- rule XXII

      This clause was added in the 112th Congress (sec. 2(b), H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 5, 2011, p. _). It applies to bills and joint resolutions only
    (Jan. 7, 2011, p. _) and is predicated on a number of days (not hours)
    of availability, including electronic availability in consonance with
    clause 3 of rule XXIX (Mar. 17, 2011, p. _). A point of order under this
    clause is not ripe until the measure in question is called up for
    consideration (Mar. 17, 2011, p. _).

                                  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 901]]

    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 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

    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 chair to make
    the motion (Deschler-Brown, ch. 33, Sec. 2.13). The motion to send to
    conference is in order only if the Speaker chooses to recognize for that
    purpose, and the Speaker will not recognize for the motion where there
    has been referred a nongermane Senate amendment 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 chair be directed to
    offer a motion under this clause whenever the chair 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 902]]

      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 903]]

    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.

      Although  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 because 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 904]]

    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).

      Although 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 905]]

    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, because 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 906]]

    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 907]]

    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,
    pp. 9923 0925); (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); (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, because it is a joint report to the two
    Houses (Oct. 3, 2000, p. 20560).

      Although 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 908]]

      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
    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 proponent
    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 909]]

    2003, p. 7); and
    technical amendments to paragraph (c)(3) were effected in the 109th
    Congress (sec. 2(l), H. Res. 5, Jan. 4, 2005, p. 44) and 111th Congress
    (sec. 2(m), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, p. _). Paragraph (d) was added in
    the 107th Congress (sec. 2(r), H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 2001, p. 25). A
    gender-based reference was eliminated in the 111th Congress (sec. 2(l),
    H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, 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 (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,
    because 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. 21, 2003, p. 30780; May 19, 2004, p. 10129).

    [[Page 910]]

    form the House of the effects of the report on the matters
    committed to conference.

    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
    in

      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, 6505, 6507-6510).
    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 chair 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 911]]

    Resident Commissioner
    in the Congressional Record; and
          (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

          (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 transferred 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).

    [[Page 912]]

    Sec. 1083. Consideration of amendments in
    disagreement.

      (b)(1)  Except as specified in subparagraph (2), it shall not be
    in order to consider a motion to dispose of a Senate amendment reported
    in disagreement by a conference committee until--

          (A) the third calendar day (excluding Saturdays, Sundays, or legal
    holidays except when the House is in session on such a day) on which the
    report in disagreement and any accompanying statement have been
    available to Members, Delegates, and the Resident Commissioner in the
    Congressional Record; and

          (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 913]]

    on disagreement to the Senate amendment shall be
    preferential to any other motion to dispose of that amendment if the
    original motion offered by the floor manager proposes to change existing
    law and the motion to insist is offered before debate on the original
    motion by the chair 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

      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 offered
    in a timely manner by the chair of a committee of jurisdiction or a
    designee. A gender-based reference was eliminated in the 111th Congress
    (sec. 2(l), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, p. _). 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 chair of that committee to offer a
    preferential motion to insist under this clause (Oct. 20, 1993, p.
    25589).

    [[Page 914]]

    Sec. 1085. Certain conference reports considered as
    read.

      (c)  A conference report or a Senate amendment reported in
    disagreement by a conference committee that has been available as
    provided in paragraph (a) or (b) shall be considered as read when called
    up.

      Paragraph (c) was added in the 96th Congress (H. Res. 5, Jan. 15,
    1979, pp. 7-16). Before the House recodified its rules in the 106th
    Congress, this provision was found in former clause 2(c) of rule XXVIII
    (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47).

    Sec. 1086. Debate.

      (d)(1)  Subject to subparagraph (2), the
    time allotted for debate on a conference report or on a motion to
    dispose of a Senate amendment reported in disagreement by a conference
    committee shall be equally divided between the majority and minority
    parties.

      (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).

    [[Page 915]]

    on a motion to recede and concur in a Senate amendment with
    an amendment also is evenly divided. (Nov. 14, 2002, pp. 22409, 22460).
      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

      The custom has developed, however, of equally dividing between
    majority and minority parties the time on all motions to dispose of
    amendments emerging from conference in disagreement, whether reported in
    disagreement or before the House upon rejection of a conference report
    by a vote or 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, because 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 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 916]]

      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 917]]

    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

      Although 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 918]]

    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 919]]

    managers to eliminate specific
    words or phrases contained in either version and add words or phrases
    not included in either version so long as they remain within the scope
    of the differences committed to conference and do not incorporate
    additional topics, issues, or propositions not committed to conference
    (Speaker Albert, Sept. 28, 1976, pp. 33020-23).
      Before the revision of this clause in 1971, where one House struck out
    of a bill of the other all after the enacting clause and inserted a new
    text, conferees could discard language occurring both in the bill and
    substitute (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, pp. 25322,
    25323 (sustained by tabling of appeal); Dec. 7, 2005, p. 27706) 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, pp. 27706, 27707 (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

      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 920]]

    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 921]]

          (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 922]]

    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 923]]

      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 924]]

          (b) the chair 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. A gender-based reference was eliminated in the 111th Congress
    (sec. 2(l), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, p. _). 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

    [[Page 925]]

          (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.

      (4) Managers on the part of the House shall be provided a unitary time
    and place with access to 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.

      (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 926]]

    Congress, the former version of this
    provision was found in former clause 6 of rule XXVIII (H. Res. 5, Jan.
    6, 1999, p. 47). In the 108th Congress the record vote by which the
    motion is to be decided was particularized to be by the yeas and nays
    (sec. 2(u), H. Res. 5, Jan. 7, 2003, p. 7). Subparagraphs (a)(3) and (4)
    were added in the 110th Congress (sec. 303(a), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 2007,
    p. 19 (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

      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. 1), 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. 26413, p. 26443). 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. 26452).

     end segment .012  13. <>
    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 ac

    [[Page 927]]

    company the conference report and
    joint explanatory statement of the managers.

      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.

     segment .013 -- rule XXIII through rule XXIX

      This clause was added in the 110th Congress (sec. 303(b), H. Res. 6,
    Jan. 4, 2007, p. 19 (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 behave 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 the beneficial interest of such individual
    from any source, the receipt of which would occur by virtue of influence
    improperly exerted from the position of such individual in Congress.

    [[Page 928]]

          4. A Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee
    of the House may not accept gifts except as provided by clause 5 of rule
    XXV.

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

          6. A Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner--

              (a) shall keep the campaign funds of such individual separate
    from the personal funds of such individual;

              (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 a campaign account of such individual 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
    such employee receives.

    [[Page 929]]

    writing that the employee
    has complied with clause 8(a) (subject to clause 9 of rule X) as
    evidence of compliance by the chair with this clause and with clause 9
    of rule X.
          (b) In the case of a committee employee who works under the direct
    supervision of a member of the committee other than a chair, the chair
    may require that such member affirm in

          (c)(1) Except as specified in subparagraph (2)--

              (A) a Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner may not
    retain the spouse of such individual in a paid position; and

              (B) an employee of the House may not accept compensation for
    work for a committee on which the spouse of such employee 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 age 930]]

    mittee of
    which such individual is a member, and a Member should refrain from
    voting on any question at a meeting of the House or of the Committee of
    the Whole House on the state of the Union, unless or until judicial or
    executive proceedings result in reinstatement of the presumption of the
    innocence of such Member or until the Member 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 com

          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 931]]

    ployee in
    the activity described in paragraph (a) is necessary. A copy of each
    such waiver shall be filed with the Committee on Ethics.
          (b) Paragraph (a) does not apply if an employee first advises the
    employing authority of such employee of a significant financial interest
    described in paragraph (a) and obtains from such employing authority a
    written waiver stating that the participation of the em

          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 the
    signatories 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--

    [[Page 932]]

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

              (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;

    [[Page 933]]

              (2) the aircraft is owned or leased by a Member, Delegate,
    Resident Commissioner or a family member of a Member, Delegate, or
    Resident Commissioner (including an aircraft owned by an entity that is
    not a public corporation in which the Member, Delegate, Resident
    Commissioner or a family member of a Member, Delegate, or Resident
    Commissioner 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);

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

              (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 934]]

    ference report on a bill or joint resolution (including an
    accompanying joint explanatory statement of managers) on any vote cast
    by 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
    con

          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 chair 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;

    [[Page 935]]

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

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

          (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
    chair 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.

    [[Page 936]]

    ness
    organization, the other members and employees of the firm, partnership,
    or other business organization shall be subject to the same restrictions
    on lobbying that apply to the individual under this paragraph.

          (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. In the case of such an individual who is a
    member or employee of a firm, partnership, or other busi

    [[Page 937]]

    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 13 was amended in the 112th Congress to
    clarify that it does not require the disclosure of actual signatures
    (sec. 2(f), H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 2011, p. _). Clause 18 (which was an
    undesignated paragraph at the end of the rule before 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). Paragraph (b)
    was amended during the 110th Congress with regard to firms,
    partnerships, and other business organizations (sec. 303, P.L. 110-81).
    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); 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); and in the 112th Congress a technical
    change was made (sec. 2(f), H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 2011, p. _). Clauses 14
    through 17 were added in the 110th Congress (secs. 202, 207, H. Res. 6,
    Jan. 4, 2007, p. 19; sec. 404(b), H. Res. 6, Jan. 4, 2007, p. 19
    (adopted Jan. 5, 2007)). Clause 15 was amended in its entirety during
    the 110th Congress (H. Res. 363, May 2, 2007, p. 11119). Gender-based
    references were eliminated in the 111th Congress (sec. 2(l), H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 6, 2009, p. _). An amendment was effected in the 112th Congress to
    reflect a change in committee name (sec. 2(e)(8), H. Res. 5, Jan. 5,
    2011, 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 (now Ethics) was
    redefined in the same resolution. Clause 4 was entirely rewritten (and
    definitions for the purpose of clause 4 were deleted) in the 104th
    Congress to reflect the adoption of a Gift Rule (H. Res. 254, Nov. 30,
    1995, p. 35077). Before 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. 43). 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

    [[Page 938]]

      For an in-depth discussion of this rule prepared by the Committee on
    Standards of Official Conduct (now Ethics), see the House Ethics Manual
    (110th 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, because 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. 7457). The Committee on
    Standards of Official Conduct 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

    1096. Limitation on accounts.

      1.  (a) Except as provided in
    paragraph (b), a Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner may not
    maintain, or have maintained for the use of such individual, an
    unofficial office account. Funds may not be paid into an unofficial
    office account.

      (b)(1) Except as provided in subparagraph (2), a Member, Delegate, or
    Resident Commissioner may defray official expenses with funds of the
    principal campaign committee of such individual under the Federal
    Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 431 et seq.).

    [[Page 939]]

      (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, office furniture, office equipment, or 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.

      3. In this rule the term ``unofficial office account'' means an
    account or repository in which funds are received for the purpose of
    defraying otherwise unreimbursed expenses allowable under section 162(a)
    of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 as ordinary and necessary in the
    operation of a congressional office, and includes a newsletter fund
    referred to in section 527(g) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.

      This provision (formerly rule XLV) was adopted in the 95th Congress
    (H. Res. 287, Mar. 2, 1977, pp. 5933-53). It was amended in the 102d
    Congress to permit Members to receive reimbursements to their expense
    allowances for recording studio charges attributable to nonpolitical
    organizations receiving the transmissions (H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 1991, p.
    39). When the House recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, it
    consolidated former rules XLV and XLVI under clauses 1 through 9 of rule
    XXV and the second sentence of former clause 8 of rule I and former
    clauses 2(n)(5) and 5(e) of rule XI under clause 10 of rule XXV (H. Res.
    5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). This rule was redesignated as rule XXIV in the
    107th Congress (sec. 2(s), H. Res. 5, Jan. 3, 2001, p. 24). In the 109th
    Congress clause 1 was amended to permit campaign funds to be used to
    defray certain official expenses (sec. 2(j), H. Res. 5, Jan. 4, 2005, p.
    43). In the 111th Congress a technical correction to clause 1(b)(2) was
    effected and gender-based references in clause 1 were eliminated (secs.
    2(l), 2(m), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, p. _).

    [[Page 940]]

    Limitations on use of the frank
      For an in-depth discussion of this rule prepared by the Committee on
    Standards of Official Conduct (now Ethics), see the House Ethics Manual
    (110th 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.

      6. A mass mailing that is otherwise frankable by a Member, Delegate,
    or Resident Commissioner under the provisions of section 3210(e) of
    title 39, United States Code, is not frankable unless the cost of
    preparing and printing it is defrayed exclusively from funds made
    available in an appropriation Act.

      7. A Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner may not send a mass
    mailing outside the congressional district from which elected.

    [[Page 941]]

    would have been postmarked, if it were of a type
    customarily postmarked, applies.
      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 such individual is a candidate for public office. If the mail
    matter is of a type that is not customarily postmarked, the date on
    which it

      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

          (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. 43). Gender-based references were eliminated in the 111th
    Congress (sec. 2(l), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, p. _).

    [[Page 942]]

    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 (now Ethics), see the House Ethics Manual
    (110th Cong., 2d Sess.).

            Congress

    1098. Travel by Members not reelected.

      10.  Funds from the
    applicable accounts described in clause 1(k)(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 such individual 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 943]]

      This provision was added in the 95th Congress (H. Res. 287, Mar. 2,
    1977, p. 5941). In the 105th and 106th Congresses this clause was
    amended to update archaic references to the ``contingent fund'' (H. Res.
    5, Jan. 7, 1997, p. 121; H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). When the House
    recodified its rules in the 106th Congress, it consolidated the second
    sentence of former clause 8 of rule I and former clauses 2(n)(5) and
    5(e) of rule XI under clause 10 of former rule XXV (redesignated as rule
    XXIV in the 107th Congress) (H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 1999, p. 47). Conforming
    changes were effected in the 109th and 112th Congresses (sec. 2(a), H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 4, 2005, p. 42; sec. 2(e)(8), H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 2011, p.
    _). A gender-based reference was eliminated in the 111th Congress (sec.
    2(l), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, p. _).

                                    Rule XXV

    Outside earned income; honoraria
          limitations on outside earned income and acceptance of gifts

    1099. Income limitations.

      1. (a)  Except as provided by
    paragraph (b), a Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or
    employee of the House may not--

          (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 944]]

    curs 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, officer, or employee of the House, such
    individual may not have outside earned income attributable to the
    portion of a calendar year that oc

      (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 945]]

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

          (b) permit the name of such individual 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 Ethics.
    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 946]]

    on Ethics 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 receive copyright royalties under a contract entered
    into on or after January 1, 1996, unless that contract is first approved
    by the Committee

      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 947]]

    cer, 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 Member, Delegate, Resident
    Commissioner, officer, or employee of the House, excluding any actual
    and necessary travel expenses incurred by that Member, Delegate,
    Resident Commissioner, offi

      (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 the residence or principal place of
    employment of such individual.

      (d)(1) In this rule the term ``outside earned income'' means, with
    respect to a Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or
    employee of the House, wages, salaries, fees, and other amounts received
    or to be received as compensation for personal services actually
    rendered, but does not include--

          (A) the salary of a Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner,
    officer, or employee;

          (B) any compensation derived by a Member, Delegate, Resident
    Commissioner, officer, or employee of the House for personal services
    actually rendered before the adoption of this rule or before such
    individual became a Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or
    employee;

    [[Page 948]]

    ficer, or employee of the House to a tax-
    qualified pension, profit-sharing, or stock bonus plan and received by
    such individual from such a plan;
          (C) any amount paid by, or on behalf of, a Member, Delegate,
    Resident Commissioner, of

          (D) in the case of a Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner,
    officer, or employee of the House engaged in a trade or business in
    which such individual or the family of such individual 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 such individual 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 949]]

    that a Member of Congress may not accept honoraria in
    excess of 40 percent of a Member's 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 (now Ethics) (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). Gender-based references were eliminated in the 111th Congress (sec.
    2(l), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, p. _). Amendments were effected in the
    112th Congress to reflect a change in committee name (sec. 2(e)(8), H.
    Res. 5, Jan. 5, 2011, p. _).
      The rule on outside earned income (formerly rule XLVII) was adopted in
    the 95th Congress (H. Res. 287, Mar. 2, 1977, pp. 5933-53). It was
    amended for the first time in the 96th Congress to increase the limit on
    a single honorarium from $750 to $1000 (H. Res. 5, Jan. 15, 1979, pp. 7-
    16). The rule was amended further in the 97th Congress to (1) increase
    the limitation on outside earned income for a calendar year from 15 to
    30 percent of a Member's salary; (2) strike the $1000 limitation on a
    single honorarium; and (3) provide that honoraria shall be attributable
    to the calendar year in which payment is received (H. Res. 305, Dec. 15,
    1981, p. 31529). In the 99th Congress, the rule was amended to delete
    the 30 percent of aggregate salary limitation on outside earned income
    and to conform the limitation to that contained in law (2 U.S.C. 31-1
    provides

      For an in-depth discussion of this rule prepared by the Committee on
    Standards of Official Conduct (now Ethics), see the House Ethics Manual
    (110th Cong., 2d Sess.).

    [[Page 950]]

    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).
      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

    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 951]]

    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 952]]

      (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 the official position of
    such individual.

      (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 953]]

    such individual and not because of the personal friendship.
          (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 the official position of

          (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 the relationship of such individual with
    the individual giving the gift, including any previous exchange of gifts
    between them.

              (II) Whether to the actual knowledge of such individual 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 the actual knowledge of such individual 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.

    [[Page 954]]

          (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
    Ethics.

          (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--

              (i) resulting from the outside business or employment
    activities of the Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or
    employee of the House (or other outside activities that are not
    connected to the duties of such individual as an officeholder), or of
    the spouse of such individual, if such benefits have not been offered or
    enhanced because of the official position of such individual and are
    customarily provided to others in similar circumstances;

              (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.

    [[Page 955]]

    cals, other written
    materials, audiotapes, videotapes, or other forms of communication.
          (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, periodi

          (J) Awards or prizes that are given to competitors in contests or
    events open to the public, including random drawings.

          (K) Honorary degrees (and associated travel, food, refreshments,
    and entertainment) and other bona fide, nonmonetary awards presented in
    recognition of public service (and associated food, refreshments, and
    entertainment provided in the presentation of such degrees and awards).

          (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).

    [[Page 956]]

          (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;

              (iii) offered to members of an organization, such as an
    employees' association or congressional 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;

              (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.

    [[Page 957]]

          (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 Ethics.

          (U) Food or refreshments of a nominal value offered other than as
    a part of a meal.

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

          (W) An item of nominal value such as a greeting card, baseball
    cap, or a T-shirt.

      (4)(A) A Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee
    of the House may accept an offer of free attendance at a widely attended
    convention, conference, symposium, forum, panel discussion, dinner,
    viewing, reception, or similar event, provided by the sponsor of the
    event, if--

          (i) the Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or
    employee of the House participates in the event as a speaker or a panel
    participant, by presenting information related to Congress or matters
    before Congress, or by performing a ceremonial function appropriate to
    the official position of such individual; or

    [[Page 958]]

          (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.

      (C) A Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee of
    the House, or the spouse or dependent thereof, may accept a sponsor's
    unsolicited offer of free attendance at a charity event, except that
    reimbursement for transportation and lodging may not be accepted in
    connection with the event unless--

          (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.

    [[Page 959]]

      (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.

      (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 Ethics 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 the duties of such individual 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--

    [[Page 960]]

    whose direct supervision the employee works, to accept
    reimbursement; and
          (i) in the case of an employee, receives advance authorization,
    from the Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, or officer under

          (ii) discloses the expenses reimbursed or to be reimbursed and the
    authorization to the Clerk within 15 days after the travel is completed.

      (B) For purposes of subdivision (A), events, the activities of which
    are substantially recreational in nature, are not considered to be in
    connection with the duties of a Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner,
    officer, or employee of the House as an officeholder.

      (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 Ethics 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

    [[Page 961]]

    to be practically required to participate in the one-day event.
          (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

      (2) Each advance authorization to accept reimbursement shall be signed
    by the Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, or officer of the House
    under whose direct supervision the employee works and shall include--

          (A) the name of the employee;

          (B) the name of the person who will make the reimbursement;

          (C) the time, place, and purpose of the travel; and

          (D) a determination that the travel is in connection with the
    duties of the employee as an officeholder and would not create the
    appearance that the employee is using public office for private gain.

      (3) Each disclosure made under subparagraph (1)(A) shall be signed by
    the Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, or officer (in the case of
    travel by that Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, or officer) or
    by the Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, or officer under whose
    direct supervision the employee works (in the case of travel by an
    employee) and shall include--

          (A) a good faith estimate of total transportation expenses
    reimbursed or to be reimbursed;

          (B) a good faith estimate of total lodging expenses reimbursed or
    to be reimbursed;

    [[Page 962]]

          (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

          (G) in the case of a reimbursement to a Member, Delegate, Resident
    Commissioner, or officer, a determination that the travel was in
    connection with the duties of such individual as an officeholder and
    would not create the appearance that the Member, Delegate, Resident
    Commissioner, or officer is using public office for private gain.

      (4) In this paragraph the term ``necessary transportation, lodging,
    and related expenses''--

          (A) includes reasonable expenses that are necessary for travel for
    a period not exceeding four days within the United States or seven days
    exclusive of travel time outside of the United States unless approved in
    advance by the Committee on Ethics;

          (B) is limited to reasonable expenditures for transportation,
    lodging, conference fees and materials, and food and refreshments,
    including reimbursement for necessary transportation, whether or not
    such transportation occurs within the periods described in subdivision
    (A);

    [[Page 963]]

    tainment 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
          (C) does not include expenditures for recreational activities, nor
    does it include enter

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

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

      (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.

    [[Page 964]]

    ment
    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 Ethics to implement
    paragraph (b)(1)(C) of this clause.
      (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 involve

      (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 expenses 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.

      (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 Ethics 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--

    [[Page 965]]

                  (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

                  (iii) certifies that the trip meets the requirements
    specified in rules prescribed by the Committee on Ethics 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, request, or arrangement of the
    trip considered to qualify as de minimis under such rules;

              (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

    [[Page 966]]

    graph (i)(1)(B) of this clause, obtain the prior
    approval of the committee for such trip.
          (2) after the Committee on Ethics has promulgated the regulations
    mandated in para

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

          (1) Anything provided by a registered lobbyist or an agent of a
    foreign principal to an entity that is maintained or controlled by a
    Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee of the
    House.

          (2) A charitable contribution (as defined in section 170(c) of the
    Internal Revenue Code of 1986) made by a registered lobbyist or an agent
    of a foreign principal on the basis of a designation, recommendation, or
    other specification of a Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner,
    officer, or employee of the House (not including a mass mailing or other
    solicitation directed to a broad category of persons or entities), other
    than a charitable contribution permitted by paragraph (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.

    [[Page 967]]

    the Resident Commissioner, officers, or employees 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,

      (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--

    [[Page 968]]

          (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.

      (h) All the provisions of this clause shall be interpreted and
    enforced solely by the Committee on Ethics. The Committee on Ethics is
    authorized to issue guidance on any matter contained in this clause.

      (i)(1) Not later than 45 days after the date of adoption of this
    paragraph and at annual intervals thereafter, the Committee on Ethics
    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

    [[Page 969]]

    travel
    covered by this clause, including any required certifications.
          (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

      (2) In developing and revising guidelines under subparagraph (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 970]]

    (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. 14156). In the 111th Congress a
    technical correction to paragraph (i)(2) was effected and gender-based
    references were eliminated (secs. 2(l), 2(m), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009,
    p. _). Amendments were effected in the 112th Congress to reflect a
    change in committee name (sec. 2(e)(8), H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 2011, p. _).

      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. 43). 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

    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 acting as an agent for the prosecution of
    a claim against the Government or if interested in such claim, except as
    an original claimant or in the proper discharge of official duties.

    [[Page 971]]

    Gender-based references were
    eliminated in the 111th Congress (sec. 2(l), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, p.
    _). 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).

      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).

      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).

    Sec. 1102a. Lobbying contact with spouse of Member.

      7.  A
    Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner shall prohibit all staff
    employed by that Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner (including
    staff in personal, committee, and leadership offices) from making any
    lobbying contact (as defined in section 3 of the Lobbying Disclosure Act
    of 1995) with that individual's spouse if that spouse is a lobbyist
    under the Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995 or is employed or retained by
    such a lobbyist for the purpose of influencing legislation.

      This provision was adopted in the 110th Congress (sec. 302, P.L. 110-
    81).

    [[Page 972]]

    Sec. 1102b. Prohibition during political
    convention.

      8.  During the dates on which the national political party to
    which a Member (including a Delegate or Resident Commissioner) belongs
    holds its convention to nominate a candidate for the office of President
    or Vice President, the Member may not participate in an event honoring
    that Member, other than in the capacity as a candidate for such office,
    if such event is directly paid for by a registered lobbyist under the
    Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995 or a private entity that retains or
    employs such a registered lobbyist.

      This provision was adopted in the 110th Congress (sec. 305, P.L.
    110-81). A gender-based reference was eliminated in the 111th Congress
    (sec. 2(l), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, p. _).

                                    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 Ethics. By August 1 of each year, the Clerk shall
    compile all such reports sent to the Clerk 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 973]]

    with the Clerk within the seven-day period beginning
    on the date on which the report is filed to the Committee on Ethics and
    shall have them printed as a House document and made available to the
    public pursuant to clause 1.

      3. Members of the board of the Office of Congressional Ethics shall
    file annual financial disclosure reports with the Clerk of the House on
    or before May 15 of each calendar year after any year in which they
    perform the duties of that position. Such reports shall be on a form
    prepared by the Clerk that is substantially similar to form 450 of the
    Office of Government Ethics. The Clerk shall send a copy of each such
    report filed

      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 (now
    Ethics) (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 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). Clause 3 was added in the 110th Congress (H. Res. 895, Mar. 11,
    2008, p. _). A gender-based reference was eliminated in the 111th
    Congress (sec. 2(l), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, p. _). This rule was
    amended in the 112th Congress to reflect a change in committee name
    (sec. 2(e)(8), H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 2011, p. _).

      For an in-depth discussion of this rule prepared by the Committee on
    Standards of Official Conduct (now Ethics), see the House Ethics Manual
    (110th Cong., 2d Sess.).

    [[Page 974]]

      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.

      (d) Any individual who is an officer or employee described in
    subsection (f) during any calendar year and performs the duties of his
    position or office for a period in excess of sixty days in that calendar
    year shall file on or before May 15 of the succeeding year a report
    containing the information described in section 102(a).

      (e) Any individual who occupies a position described in subsection (f)
    shall, on or before the thirtieth day after termination of employment in
    such position, file a report containing the information described in
    section 102(a) covering the preceding calendar year if the report
    required by subsection (d) has not been filed and covering the portion
    of the calendar year in which such termination occurs up to the date the
    individual left such office or position, unless such individual has
    accepted employment in another position described in subsection (f).

      (f) The officers and employees referred to in subsections (a), (d),
    and (e) are-- * * *

      (9) a Member of Congress as defined under section 109(12);

      (10) an officer or employee of the Congress as defined under section
    109(13);

    [[Page 975]]

                                   * * *

      (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

            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.

    [[Page 976]]

      (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.

      (3) The identity and category of value of any interest in property
    held during the preceding calendar year in a trade or business, or for
    investment or the production of income, which has a fair market value
    which exceeds $1,000 as of the close of the preceding calendar year,
    excluding any personal liability owed to the reporting individual by a
    spouse, or by a parent, brother, sister, or child of the reporting
    individual or of the reporting individual's spouse, or any deposits
    aggregating $5,000 or less in a personal savings account. For purposes
    of this paragraph, a personal savings account shall include any
    certificate of deposit or any other form of deposit in a bank, savings
    and loan association, credit union, or similar financial institution.

      (4) The identity and category of value of the total liabilities owed
    to any creditor other than a spouse, or a parent, brother, sister, or
    child of the reporting individual or of the reporting individual's
    spouse which exceed $10,000 at any time during the preceding calendar
    year, excluding--

              (A) any mortgage secured by real property which is a personal

            residence of the reporting individual or his spouse; and

              (B) any loan secured by a personal motor vehicle, household

            furniture, or appliances, which loan does not exceed the

    [[Page 977]]

    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--

              (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.

    [[Page 978]]

    cuted 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.
      (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 exe

      (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:

              (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.

    [[Page 979]]

    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.
      (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

      (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

            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

    [[Page 980]]

    (iii) from
            activities of the reporting individual, and

            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.

      (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

    [[Page 981]]

            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

                    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

    [[Page 982]]

    quired by law or to provide the information
                    re

                    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

            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.

    [[Page 983]]

    dependent child, or minor child of such a person, if the
    supervising ethics office for such reporting individual finds that--
      (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,

              (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).

                                      * * *

      (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,

    [[Page 984]]

            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.

      (C)(i) The Attorney General may bring a civil action in any
    appropriate United States district court against any individual who
    knowingly and willfully violates the provisions of subparagraph (A) or
    (B) of this paragraph. The court in which such action is brought may
    assess against such individual a civil penalty in any amount not to
    exceed $10,000.

      (ii) The Attorney General may bring a civil action in any appropriate
    United States district court against any individual who negligently
    violates the provisions of subparagraph (A) or (B) of this paragraph.
    The court in which such action is brought may assess against such
    individual a civil penalty in any amount not to exceed $5,000.

      (7) Any trust may be considered to be a qualified blind trust if--

              (A) the trust instrument is amended to comply with the

            requirements of paragraph (3) or, in the case of a trust

            instrument which does not by its terms permit amendment, the

            trustee, the reporting individual, and any other interested

            party agree in writing that the trust shall be administered in

            accordance with the requirements of this subsection and the

            trustee of such trust meets the requirements of paragraph

            (3)(A); except that in the case of any interested party who is a

            dependent child, a parent or guardian of such child may execute

    [[Page 985]]

            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--

              (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.

    * * *

                                   [[Page 986]]

      (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

                    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.

    [[Page 987]]

      (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)(1) 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 $50,000.

      (2)(A) It shall be unlawful for any person to knowingly and
    willfully--

              (i) falsify any information that such person is required to

            report under section 102; and

              (ii) fail to file or report any information that such person

            is required to report under section 102.

      (B) Any person who--

              (i) violates subparagraph (A)(i) shall be fined under title

            18, United States Code, imprisoned for not more than 1 year, or

            both; and

              (ii) violates subparagraph (A)(ii) shall be fined under title

            18, United States Code.

      (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 988]]

      (c) The President, the Vice President, the Secretary concerned, the
    head of each agency, the Office of Personnel Management, a congressional
    ethics committee, and the Judicial Conference of the United States, may
    take any appropriate personnel or other action in accordance with
    applicable law or regulation against any individual failing to file a
    report or falsifying or failing to report information required to be
    reported.

      (d)(1) Any individual who files a report required to be filed under
    this title more than 30 days after the later of--

              (A) the date such report is required to be filed pursuant to

            the provisions of this title and the rules and regulations

            promulgated thereunder; or

              (B) if a filing extension is granted to such individual under

            section 101(g), the last day of the filing extension period,

            shall, at the direction of and pursuant to regulations issued by

            the supervising ethics office, pay a filing fee of $200. All

            such fees shall be deposited in the miscellaneous receipts of

            the Treasury. The authority under this paragraph to direct the

            payment of a filing fee may be delegated by the supervising

            ethics office in the executive branch to other agencies in the

            executive branch.

      (2) The supervising ethics office may waive the filing fee under this
    subsection in extraordinary circumstances.

                     custody of and public access to reports

      Sec. 105. (a) Each agency, each supervising ethics office in the
    executive or judicial branch, the Clerk of the House of Representatives,
    and the Secretary of the Senate shall make available to the public, in
    accordance with subsection (b), each report filed under this title with
    such agency or office or with the Clerk or the Secretary of the Senate.

                                      * * *

      (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.

    [[Page 989]]

      (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 990]]

      (2) The Attorney General may bring a civil action against any person
    who obtains or uses a report for any purpose prohibited in paragraph (1)
    of this subsection. The court in which such action is brought may assess
    against such person a penalty in any amount not to exceed $10,000. Such
    remedy shall be in addition to any other remedy available under
    statutory or common law.

      (d) Any report filed with or transmitted to an agency or supervising
    ethics office or to the Clerk of the House of Representatives or the
    Secretary of the Senate pursuant to this title shall be retained by such
    agency or office or by the Clerk or the Secretary of the Senate, as the
    case may be. Such report shall be made available to the public for a
    period of six years after receipt of the report. After such six-year
    period the report shall be destroyed unless needed in an ongoing
    investigation, except that in the case of an individual who filed the
    report pursuant to section 101(b) and was not subsequently confirmed by
    the Senate, or who filed the report pursuant to section 101(c) and was
    not subsequently elected, such reports shall be destroyed one year after
    the individual either is no longer under consideration by the Senate or
    is no longer a candidate for nomination or election to the Office of
    President, Vice President, or as a Member of Congress, unless needed in
    an ongoing investigation.

                                review of reports

      Sec. 106. (a)(1) Each designated agency ethics official or Secretary
    concerned shall make provisions to ensure that each report filed with
    him under this title is reviewed within sixty days after the date of
    such filing, except that the Director of the Office of Government Ethics
    shall review only those reports required to be transmitted to him under
    this title within sixty days after the date of transmittal.

      (2) Each congressional ethics committee and the Judicial Conference
    shall make provisions to ensure that each report filed under this title
    is reviewed within sixty days after the date of such filing.

      (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

            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

    [[Page 991]]

    mation submitted, the
            or not, on the basis of infor

            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.

      (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.

    [[Page 992]]

    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.

      (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

             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.

      (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.

    [[Page 993]]

      (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;

      (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;

    [[Page 994]]

                                   * * *

      (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

            (except any officer or employee of the Government Accountability

            Office) 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;

              (ii) each officer or employee of the Government Accountability

            Office who, for at least 60 consecutive days, occupies a

            position for which the rate of basic pay, minus the amount of

            locality pay that would have been authorized under section 5304

            of title 5, United States Code (had the officer or employee been

            paid under the General Schedule) for the locality within which

            the position of such officer or employee is located (as

            determined by the Comptroller General), is equal to or greater

            than 120 percent of the minimum rate of basic pay payable for

            GS-15 of the General Schedule; and

              (iii) 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 995]]

      (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 996]]

    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

           Disclosure by Members and Staff of Employment Negotiations

    [[Page 997]]

    Ethics a statement, which
    must be signed by the Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner,
    regarding such negotiations or agreement, including the name of the
    private entity or entities involved in such negotiations or agreement,
    and the date such negotiations or agreement commenced.

    Sec. 1103a. Employment negotiation disclosure.

      1.  A Member,
    Delegate, or Resident Commissioner shall not directly negotiate or have
    any agreement of future employment or compensation, unless such Member,
    Delegate, or Resident Commissioner, within 3 business days after the
    commencement of such negotiation or agreement of future employment or
    compensation, files with the Committee on

      2. An officer or an employee of the House earning in excess of 75
    percent of the salary paid to a Member shall notify the Committee on
    Ethics that such individual is negotiating or has any agreement of
    future employment or compensation.

      3. The disclosure and notification under this rule shall be made
    within 3 business days after the commencement of such negotiation or
    agreement of future employment or compensation.

      4. A Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner, and an officer or
    employee to whom this rule applies, shall recuse himself or herself from
    any matter in which there is a conflict of interest or an appearance of
    a conflict for that Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or
    employee under this rule and shall notify the Committee on Ethics of
    such recusal. A Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner making such
    recusal shall, upon such recusal, submit to the Clerk for public
    disclosure the statement of disclosure under clause 1 with respect to
    which the recusal was made.

    [[Page 998]]

    in the 112th Congress to reflect a change in committee name (sec.
    2(e)(8), H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 2011, p. _).

      This rule was added in the 110th Congress by Public Law 110-81 (121
    Stat. 751). In the 111th Congress clause 1 was amended to apply also to
    non-returning Members and a gender-based reference was eliminated (secs.
    2(k), 2(l), H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, p. _). This rule was amended

                                   Rule XXVIII

                                   (Reserved.)

    Sec. 1104. Former rule on public debt limit.

      The  rule
    ``Statutory Limit on Public Debt'' was repealed in the 112th Congress
    (sec. 2(d)(2), H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 2011, p. _). For its text and history,
    see Sec. 1104 of the House Rules and Manual for the 111th Congress (H.
    Doc. 110-162).

                                    Rule XXIX

                               general provisions

    Sec. 1105. Relations of Jefferson's Manual and provisions
    of law 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 one gender include the other as
    well.

    [[Page 999]]

    importance of Jefferson's
    Manual as an authority in congressional procedure has been discussed
    (VII, 1029, 1049; VIII, 2501, 2517, 2518, 3330). end segment .013

      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), redesignated
    as rule XXVIII in the 108th Congress (sec. 2(t), H. Res. 5, Jan. 7,
    2003, p. 7), and redesignated as rule XXIX in the 110th Congress (sec.
    301, P.L. 110-81). Clause 2 was amended in the 111th Congress when
    gender-based references throughout the rules were eliminated (sec. 2(l),
    H. Res. 5, Jan. 6, 2009, p. _). The

    Sec. 1105b. Layover satisfied by electronic
    availability.

      3.  If a measure or matter is publicly available in
    electronic form at a location designated by the Committee on House
    Administration, it shall be considered as having been available to
    Members, Delegates, and the Resident Commissioner for purposes of these
    rules.

      This clause was added in the 112th Congress (sec. 2(c)(2), H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 5, 2011, p. _). The 112th Congress provided a transition rule
    pending the designation by the committee under this clause (sec. 3(n),
    H. Res. 5, Jan. 5, 2011, p. _).

    Sec. 1105d. Authoritative guidance of budgetary
    levels.

      4.  Authoritative guidance from the Committee on the Budget
    concerning the impact of a legislative proposition on the levels of new
    budget authority, outlays, direct pending, new entitlement authority and
    revenues may be provided by the chair of the committee.

      This clause was added in the 112th Congress (sec. 2(d)(3), H. Res. 5,
    Jan. 5, 2011, p. _). This authority elucidates the responsibilities of
    the Committee on the Budget under section 312 of the Congressional
    Budget Act (see Sec. 1127, infra). The 112th Congress authorized the
    chair of the committee to make specified adjustments under this clause
    pending the adoption of a certain budget resolution (sec. 3(h), H. Res.
    5, Jan. 5, 2011, p. _). segment .014 -- re-org, jt & select, offices,
    early org