Ch. 30 § 52

mittee amendment and was not agreed ment,(11) since, after the stage of to in . . . . disagreement has been reached, MR. YATES: Mr. , a further the motion which most quickly parliamentary inquiry. brings the two Houses together is THE SPEAKER: The gentleman will preferential. But if the House re- state it. cedes from its disagreement, then MR. YATES: Mr. Speaker, may a sep- a motion to takes prece- arate vote be taken on a portion of a committee amendment, namely section dence over concurring. 206(a) and (b) on page 83? THE SPEAKER: A separate vote can- not be had on a portion of the amend- In a Senate Amendment ment reported by the . The amendment must be voted § 52.1 A motion that the House on in its entirety as reported by the recede and concur in a Sen- ( ) Committee of the Whole. 10 ate amendment is divisible upon request of any Member, and the House does not vote § 52. Motions To Recede on whether to divide the mo- and Concur tion.(12) The divisibility of the motion to 11. It is to be noted that the phrase ‘‘a recede and concur may alter the motion to recede and concur with an preferential nature of certain mo- amendment’’ is a term of art in par- liamentary parlance and refers to a tions following such division. The motion that the House recede from motion to recede and concur in a its disagreement to a Senate amend- Senate amendment, for example, ment and concur therein with a fur- takes precedence over a motion to ther House amendment. It must be recede and concur with an amend- distinguished from the ‘‘motion to re- cede and concur’’—which refers to a 10. Similar, though less explicit, rulings simple motion that the House recede may be found in later Congresses. from its disagreement to a Senate See, for example, the following: 114 amendment and decide to concur in CONG. REC. 24242, 90th Cong. 2d that Senate amendment. Sess., July 30, 1968; 114 CONG. REC. 12. This precedent is well established. 21546, 90th Cong. 2d Sess., July 16, For similar instances, see 109 CONG. 1968; 114 CONG. REC. 1421, 90th REC. 8506, 88th Cong. 1st Sess., May Cong. 2d Sess., Jan. 30, 1968; 113 14, 1963; 107 CONG. REC. 16325, CONG. REC. 29317, 90th Cong. 1st 87th Cong. 1st Sess., Aug. 10, 1961; Sess., Oct. 18, 1967; and 104 CONG. 106 CONG. REC. 14074, 86th Cong. REC. 16264, 85th Cong. 2d Sess., 2d Sess., June 23, 1960; 91 CONG. Aug. 5, 1958. REC. 4492, 79th Cong. 1st Sess., May

11787 Ch. 30 § 52 DESCHLER-BROWN PRECEDENTS

On June 28, 1972,(13) Mr. Rob- The Clerk read as follows: ert R. Casey, of Texas, called up Mr. Casey of Texas moves that the the conference report on a bill House further insist on its disagree- ment to the amendment of the Sen- (H.R. 13955) making appropria- ate numbered 36. tions for the legislative branch for MR. [SAMUEL S.] STRATTON [of New the fis-cal year ending June 30, York]: Mr. Speaker, I offer a pref- 1973, and for other purposes. The erential motion. vote was taken on the conference The Clerk read as follows: report, and it was agreed to. Mr. Stratton moves that the House Thereafter, the Speaker directed recede from its disagreement to Sen- the Clerk to report the amend- ate amendment numbered 36 and concur therein. ments remaining in disagreement between the Houses. Among those MR. CASEY of Texas: Mr. Speaker, I was Senate amendment No. 36, as request a division of the question. MR. STRATTON: Mr. Speaker, a par- to which the following discussion liamentary inquiry. took place: THE SPEAKER: The gentleman will THE SPEAKER: (14) The Clerk will re- state it. port the next amendment in disagree- MR. STRATTON: Is the request for a ment. division of the question presumably to The Clerk read as follows: recede on one part and concur on the other part? Is this subject to a vote or Senate amendment numbered 36: Page 24, line 20, insert: something? THE SPEAKER: All of the motion is EXTENSION OF THE CAPITOL subject to a vote. The question is on Funds available under this appro- the matter of receding from disagree- priation may be used for the prepa- ment. ration of preliminary plans for the MR. STRATTON: A further parliamen- extension of the west central front: tary inquiry, Mr. Speaker. If a Member Provided, however, That no funds may be used for the preparation of is in favor of accepting the Senate the final plans or initiation of con- amendment, then he would oppose the struction of said project until specifi- motion to divide on the vote. Is that cally approved and appropriated correct? therefor by the Congress. THE SPEAKER: This is not a question MR. CASEY of Texas: Mr. Speaker, I of voting on the division but a question offer a motion. of voting on the motion to recede. MR. STRATTON: A further parliamen- 11, 1945; and 89 CONG. REC. 5899, tary inquiry. My understanding is that 78th Cong. 1st Sess., June 15, 1943. if the motion to divide succeeds and 13. 118 CONG. REC. 22959, 22974, 92d passes, then it is possible Cong. 2d Sess. parliamentarily to offer an amendment 14. Carl Albert (Okla.). to the Senate amendment rather than

11788 VOTING Ch. 30 § 52

to accept the Senate amendment. Is up the conference report on a bill that not correct? (H.R. 7851) making appropria- THE SPEAKER: If the motion to re- cede from disagreement is adopted, tions for the Department of De- then a motion to concur in the Senate fense for the fiscal year ending amendment with an amendment is in June 30, 1962, and for other pur- order. . . . poses. The report was agreed to, MR. STRATTON: Mr. Speaker, I am and the House then proceeded to confused. My original question was whether the proposal to divide the consider the Senate amendments question into two parts was subject to remaining in disagreement. a vote. One of these amendments (No. THE SPEAKER: Division of a question 26) provided for $207,600,000 to is a right which any Member of the be utilized for civil defense activi- House enjoys. MR. [SIDNEY R.] YATES [of Illinois]: ties, including the hiring of motor Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary inquiry. vehicles and the providing of fall- At what point is it in order for the gen- out shelters in government-owned tleman from New York to offer his mo- or leased buildings. Mr. Mahon tion to recede and concur with the Sen- moved that the House recede from ate. THE SPEAKER: The motion is pend- its disagreement to this amend- ing. The gentleman from Texas asked ment and concur therein. for a division. Mr. John Taber, of New York, MR. YATES: Is it in order at this requested the question be divided point for the gentleman from New and upon so doing, the Speaker York to offer his motion to recede and ( ) concur? Pro Tempore 16 put the question THE SPEAKER: That motion is pend- to the House. ing. The question is shall the House re- The House having decided to re- cede from its disagreement to the Sen- cede from its disagreement to Sen- ate amendment. The motion was agreed to. ate amendment No. 26, Mr. Taber subsequently moved to concur in § 52.2 A preferential motion to the amendment with an amend- recede and concur having ment. been divided, the House After some discussion of the agreed first to recede and proposed Taber amendment which subsequently to concur. called for a reduction in the fund- On Aug. 10, 1961,(15) Mr. ing by $93 million, Mr. Mahon George H. Mahon, of Texas, called moved the and the House rejected Mr. Taber’s 15. 107 CONG. REC. 15320, 15325, motion. 15326, 15331, 15336, 87th Cong. 1st Sess. 16. Carl Albert (Okla.).

11789 Ch. 30 § 52 DESCHLER-BROWN PRECEDENTS

The motion to concur with an concur in the Senate amendment amendment having failed, the pre- with the same amendment which viously offered Mahon motion to had been incorporated in Mr. concur in the Senate amendment Thomas’ original motion. Since was then put before the House. the House had already receded, (17) The motion was agreed to. this motion was now preferential § 52.3 A motion to recede and to the remaining portion of the concur in a Senate amend- Barry motion. The Thomas pro- ment having been divided, posal was rejected, however. the House receded from dis- The question then recurred on agreement, rejected both a the second part of the Barry mo- motion to concur with an tion (i.e., to concur in the Senate amendment and a motion to amendment) which was also re- concur, and decided there- jected. Mr. George Meader, of after to insist on disagree- Michigan, then moved that the ment. House insist on its disagreement to the Senate amendment. This (18) On May 14, 1963, the con- motion was agreed to, without dis- ference report on the supple- cussion. mental appropriation bill of 1963 (H.R. 5517) having been agreed § 52.4 A motion that the House to, Mr. Albert Thomas, of Texas, recede from its disagreement moved that the House recede from its disagreement to a Senate and concur in a Senate amendment No. 76, and concur amendment with an amend- therein with an amendment. Mr. ment is divisible only as be- Robert R. Barry, of New York, tween receding and then then offered a preferential motion concurring with an amend- to recede and concur in the Senate ment. amendment. Mr. Thomas having On Mar. 21, 1946,(19) the House demanded a division of the propo- sition, the motion to recede was had under consideration a con- entertained and subsequently ference report pertaining to the agreed to. independent offices appropriation Immediately thereafter, Mr. bill of 1947. Among those Senate Thomas moved that the House amendments to the bill (H.R. 5201) which remained in disagree- 17. See also 106 CONG. REC. 14081, 86th ment were Nos. 10 and 18. After Cong. 2d Sess., June 23, 1960. 18. 109 CONG. REC. 8504, 8505, 8506, 19. 92 CONG. REC. 2521, 2523, 2525, 8509–11, 88th Cong. 1st Sess. 79th Cong. 2d Sess.

11790 VOTING Ch. 30 § 52 the conference report was agreed Mr. Richard B. Wigglesworth, of to, the aforementioned amend- Massachusetts, asked for a divi- ments were discussed. sion of the question. Mr. Hen- The first amendment remaining dricks having risen to a point of in disagreement was read to the order that the question could not House at the Speaker’s (20) re- be divided, the Speaker ruled to quest. the contrary. Thereafter, the mo- The Clerk read as follows: tion, as divided, (i.e., to recede) Senate amendment No. 10: Page 4, was put to the House and agreed line 21, insert the following: to.(1)

EMERGENCY FUND FOR THE PRESIDENT Effect of Division on Deter- mining the Question Emergency fund for the President: Not to exceed $5,000,000 of the ap- propriation ‘‘Emergency fund for the § 52.5 The motion to recede President,’’ contained in the First and concur having been di- Supplemental National Defense Ap- propriation Act, 1943, as supple- vided, the first vote applies mented and amended, is hereby con- only to the motion to recede. tinued available until June 30, 1947: ( ) Provided, That no part of such fund On May 14, 1963, 2 Mr. Albert shall be available for allocation to fi- Thomas, of Texas, called up the nance a function or project for which function or project a Budget estimate conference report on a bill (H.R. of appropriation was transmitted 5517) making supplemental ap- pursuant to law during the Seventy- propriations for the fiscal year ninth and Eightieth Congresses and such appropriation denied after con- ending June 30, 1963, and for sideration thereof by the Senate and other purposes. Following adop- House of Representatives or by the on Appropriations of tion of the report, the House con- both bodies. sidered Senate amendment No. Mr. Joseph E. Hendricks, of 76. Florida, then moved to recede and This was a proposal to author- concur in the Senate amendment ize the payment of some $73 mil- with the following amendment: lion to the Government of the Re- After the word ‘‘Senate’’ in line 12 public of the Philippines in ac- of said amendment strike out the re- cordance with previously passed mainder of the line and all of lines legislation dealing with war dam- 13 and 14 and insert in lieu thereof the following: ‘‘or House of Rep- resentatives or by the Committee on 1. See also 80 CONG. REC. 7616, 74th Appropriations of either body.’’ Cong. 2d Sess., May 20, 1936. 2. 109 CONG. REC. 8502, 8505, 8506, 20. Sam Rayburn (Tex.). 88th Cong. 1st Sess.

11791 Ch. 30 § 52 DESCHLER-BROWN PRECEDENTS age claims and in conjunction 1961, and for other purposes, with with certain newly proposed con- a Senate amendment thereto. Im- ditions. Mr. Thomas moved that mediately after so doing, the stage the House recede from its dis- of disagreement having been agreement with the amendment reached, Mr. Gary moved that the and concur with an amendment. House adhere to its disagreement Mr. Robert Barry, of New York, to the Senate amendment. then offered a preferential motion Mr. Clare E. Hoffman, of Michi- that the House recede from its gan, then offered a preferential disagreement and concur in the motion that the House recede Senate amendment. This motion, from its disagreement and concur in turn, was followed by a demand therein. Mr. Gary sought a divi- from Mr. Thomas that the ques- sion of the question on the pref- tion be divided. The Speaker (3) erential motion, and the Speaker then indicated that the first con- Pro Tempore (5) recognized him for cept in the motion, that is, wheth- an hour to control the debate. er the House would recede from After some discussion of the its disagreement to the Senate matter, which pertained to how amendment, was the question the franking privilege was to be under consideration. used, Mr. John Taber, of New York, initiated the following ex- § 52.6 Where both the motion change: to adhere and the motion to MR. TABER: Mr. Speaker, a par- recede and concur are pend- liamentary inquiry. ing, and a division of the lat- THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE: (6) The ter motion is demanded, the gentleman will state it. vote comes first on the mo- MR. TABER: Is not the parliamentary tion to recede. situation this: The gentleman from Michigan [Mr. Hoffman] has offered a On June 23, 1960,(4) Mr. J. motion to recede and concur. The gen- Vaughan Gary, of Virginia, called tleman from Virginia asked for a divi- up a bill (H.R. 10569) making ap- sion of the question. The parliamen- propriations for the Treasury and tary situation is this: We first vote on the question of receding, and if that Post Office Departments, and the carries we can vote on the other part of Tax Court of the United States for the motion? the fiscal year ending June 30, THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE: On the question of concurrence? 3. John W. McCormack (Mass.). 4. 106 CONG. REC. 14074, 14081, 86th 5. Wilbur Mills (Ark.). Cong. 2d Sess. 6. Francis E. Walter (Pa.).

11792 VOTING Ch. 30 § 52

MR. TABER: Yes. that the House recede from its THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE: That is disagreement to this amendment correct. (No. 76) and concur with an MR. TABER: If the motion to recede is amendment. After some discus- not agreed to, then that is the end of it? sion, Mr. Robert R. Barry, of New THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE: No. The York, offered the preferential mo- vote then would be on the motion to tion that the House recede and adhere. concur in Senate amendment No. The motion to adhere was not 76. A division being demanded by voted upon, however, as the mo- Mr. Thomas, the motion to recede tion to recede carried by a sub- was agreed to, and Mr. Thomas stantial margin. then moved to concur with an amendment, which was part of his § 52.7 The motion to recede original motion. This motion now and concur having been di- occupying a preferential status, it vided, and the House having was entertained before the re- receded from its disagree- maining portion of the Barry mo- ment to a Senate amend- tion. Mr. Thomas’ proposal was ment, the motion to concur rejected, however, and the Speak- ( ) with an amendment takes er 9 then indicated that the ques- precedence over the motion tion before the House was Mr. to concur.(7) Barry’s motion to concur. On May 14, 1963,(8) the con- § 52.8 A motion to recede from ference report on the supple- disagreement to a Senate mental appropriation bill of 1963 amendment and concur was before the House. Among therein being divided, and those Senate amendments re- the House having receded, if maining in disagreement was a a preferential motion to con- provision calling for some $73 mil- cur with an amendment is of- lion to be paid to the Philippine fered and rejected, the ques- government for the purposes of tion recurs on the motion to war-damage compensation. Mr. concur in the Senate amend- Albert Thomas, of Texas, moved ment. 7. For more information about the dis- A motion to recede from dis- position of amendments between the agreement to a Senate amend- Houses, see Ch. 32, infra. ment and concur therein having 8. 109 CONG. REC. 8502, 8505, 8506, 8509, 8510, 88th Cong. 1st Sess. 9. John W. McCormack (Mass.).

11793 Ch. 30 § 52 DESCHLER-BROWN PRECEDENTS been divided,(10) the motion to re- vided, the Chair informed a cede was agreed to. Member that the effect of Thereafter, a preferential mo- voting down the motion to tion to concur in the Senate recede from disagreement to amendment with an amendment the Senate amendment was offered by Mr. Albert Thom- would permit the offering of as, of Texas. After some debate a motion to insist on dis- thereon, the Speaker put the agreement. question on that motion: On May 14, 1963,(13) the con- THE SPEAKER: (11) The question is on ference report on the supple- the motion offered by the gentleman mental appropriation bill of 1963 from Texas that the House concur in (H.R. 5517) having been agreed the Senate amendment, with an to, Mr. Albert Thomas, of Texas, amendment. The motion was rejected. moved that the House recede from THE SPEAKER: The question now is its disagreement to a Senate on the second part of the motion of- amendment No. 76, and concur fered by the gentleman from New York therein with an amendment. A that the House concur in the Senate preferential motion to recede and amendment. concur having been offered, Mr. Thus, the rejection of the pref- Thomas demanded the division of erential motion revives the second the latter motion, and subse- portion of the previously divided quently moved the previous ques- motion to recede and concur (12) tion on the motion to recede. unless another preferential motion Mr. George Meader, of Michi- is offered. gan, then rose and the following exchange took place: Effect of Division When Fol- lowed by Rejection of Motion MR. MEADER: Mr. Speaker, a further parliamentary inquiry. To Recede THE SPEAKER: (14) The gentleman will state it. § 52.9 The motion to recede MR. MEADER: Would it be in order, and concur in a Senate either before the previous question is amendment having been di- agreed to or thereafter, to offer a mo- tion to further disagree with the Sen- 10. 109 CONG. REC. 8506, 8509, 8510, ate amendment? 88th Cong. 1st Sess., May 14, 1963. 11. John W. McCormack (Mass.). 13. 109 CONG. REC. 8504–06, 8508, 88th 12. See also 93 CONG. REC. 9319, 80th Cong. 1st Sess. Cong. 1st Sess., July 18, 1947. 14. John W. McCormack (Mass.).

11794 VOTING Ch. 30 § 52

THE SPEAKER: The Chair will state up the conference report on a sup- that that can be accomplished, if de- plemental defense appropriation sired, by voting down the motion to re- cede. bill for 1944 (H.R. 3598). The House subsequently agreed to the Parliamentarian’s Note: It is in report, and discussion ensued order, following the refusal of the with respect to those amendments House to recede, to entertain a motion to insist on disagree- remaining in disagreement be- ment.(15) They are not equivalent tween the Houses. questions, since the House, upon Among them was a Senate refusing to recede, could also ad- amendment No. 49, as to which here. Mr. Cannon offered a motion to recede and concur with an amend- § 52.10 There being two mo- ment. The Senate amendment tions currently pending—one dealt with a supplemental appro- to recede and concur in a priation for the Bureau of Rec- Senate amendment with an lamation. Mr. Cannon’s proposal amendment and the other a read as follows: preferential motion to recede In lieu of the sum of ‘‘$2,800,000’’ and concur—if the House re- named in such amendment, insert fuses to recede when the mo- ‘‘$700,000’’; and in lieu of the sum of tion to recede and concur is ‘‘$800,000’’ named in such amendment, divided, both motions are insert ‘‘$200,000’’. then inoperable. The House Shortly thereafter, Mr. Compton has in effect reiterated its I. White, of Idaho, offered a pref- disagreement to the Senate erential motion. amendment and a motion to The Clerk read as follows: further insist on (or a motion Mr. White moves that the House to adhere to) that position is recede from its disagreement to Sen- in order. ate amendment No. 49 and concur in the same. On Dec. 16, 1943,(16) Mr. Clar- ence Cannon, of Missouri, called Mr. Cannon then requested a division of the question, and the 15. See also 103 CONG. REC. 15519, 85th House refused to recede. Cong. 1st Sess., Aug. 21, 1957; 115 Thereafter, Mr. Cannon moved CONG. REC. 40902, 40912, 40915, 40921, 40922, 91st Cong. 1st Sess., that the House further insist on Dec. 22, 1969. its disagreement to the Senate 16. 89 CONG. REC. 10753, 10756, 10777– amendment. This motion prompt- 80, 78th Cong. 1st Sess. ed a series of parliamentary in- 11795 Ch. 30 § 52 DESCHLER-BROWN PRECEDENTS quiries from a number of Mem- on the motion previously pending, bers: which was the motion of the gentleman from Missouri to recede and concur MR. [FRANCIS H.] CASE [of South Da- with an amendment. A division of the kota]: Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary question is entirely different when two inquiry. different propositions are before the THE SPEAKER: (17) The gentleman will House. The House has refused to re- state it. cede on the dividing of the question of- MR. CASE: The first question for divi- fered by the gentleman from Idaho, but sion was a division on the amendment has not refused to recede on dividing offered by the gentleman from Idaho the question offered by the gentleman [Mr. White]. The House has refused to from Missouri in his original motion. recede on the division of that motion. THE SPEAKER: The gentleman from Then it seems to me that the question Missouri [Mr. Cannon] has moved to recurs on the motion offered by the insist on disagreement to the Senate gentleman from Missouri [Mr. Cannon] amendment. The Chair believes there to recede and concur with an amend- is nothing to do at this time but to put ment. On that motion I ask for a divi- the gentleman’s motion. sion. The question is on the motion offered THE SPEAKER: The gentleman asks by the gentleman from Missouri, that for a division of the question. The the House insist on its disagreement. House has already refused to recede. Therefore, it would be rather anoma- Shortly thereafter, the Speaker lous if we had a division of the motion put the question to a vote. The of the gentleman from Missouri, and motion to insist carried, but was voted again on the question of reced- objected to on the ground that a ing. was not present. More MR. CANNON of Missouri: Mr. Speak- parliamentary inquiries preceded er, I insist on my motion that the the vote: House insist on its disagreement to the Senate amendment. MR. [JOHN R.] MURDOCK [of Ari- MR. CASE: Mr. Speaker, a parliamen- zona]: Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary tary inquiry. inquiry. THE SPEAKER: The gentleman will THE SPEAKER: The gentleman will state it. state it. MR. CASE: Since the motion which MR. MURDOCK: I am confused as to was offered by the gentleman from what the question is. Will the Chair re- Idaho [Mr. White] was a preferential state it? motion as against the motion offered THE SPEAKER: The motion to recede by the gentleman from Missouri [Mr. was voted down. The only motion the Cannon], I question whether or not the gentleman from Missouri had left, gentleman can then move to insist. therefore, was to further insist on the The vote, it seems to me, must recur disagreement to the Senate amend- ment. That is what we are voting on 17. Sam Rayburn (Tex.). now.

11796 VOTING Ch. 30 § 52

MR. [CLINTON P.] ANDERSON of New Effect of Division on Time Al- Mexico: Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary lotted for Debate inquiry. THE SPEAKER: The gentleman will § 52.11 A motion to recede and state it. concur in a Senate amend- MR. ANDERSON of New Mexico: Did the gentleman from Missouri withdraw ment having been divided, his motion to recede and concur with the proponent of the initial an amendment? motion retains control of the THE SPEAKER: He did not; it was not . necessary. Because of the fact that a On Dec. 22, 1969,(19) the House motion to recede had been voted down, having called up a conference re- a second motion to recede was not in order. port on a bill (H.R. 15209) making supplemental appropriations for MR. [JOHN] TABER [of New York]: Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary inquiry. the fiscal year ending June 30, 1970, and for other purposes, cer- THE SPEAKER: The gentleman will state it. tain Senate amendments re- MR. TABER: The motion to recede mained in disagreement between and concur with an amendment having the Houses. been displaced by a motion to recede Mr. George H. Mahon, of Texas, and concur, and this motion having moved that the House recede from been divided so that we voted on the its disagreement to the amend- motion to recede alone, the only motion ment of the Senate No. 33 and that could possibly be made would be concur therein. A division of the the one the gentleman from Missouri question having been demanded, did make, that the House further in- the Speaker put the first portion sist; is that correct? of the question before the House, THE SPEAKER: The Chair has so stat- and the following discussion en- ed. sued: The roll was then called, and THE SPEAKER: (20) The question is, the motion to insist was agreed Will the House recede from its dis- to.(18) agreement to the amendment of the Senate numbered 33? MR. [CLARK] MACGREGOR [of Min- 18. See also 89 CONG. REC. 7384, 78th nesota]: Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary Cong. 1st Sess., July 7, 1943, where inquiry. the Speaker indicated that ‘‘the House cannot concur until it has re- divided from an original motion to ceded;’’ and 86 CONG. REC. 5892, recede and concur) would preclude 76th Cong. 3d Sess., May 9, 1940, the subsequent offering of a motion where the Speaker Pro Tempore an- to concur with an amendment. swered a parliamentary inquiry by 19. 115 CONG. REC. 40902, 40915, 91st stating that the rejection of a motion Cong. 1st Sess. to recede (which question had been 20. John W. McCormack (Mass.).

11797 Ch. 30 § 52 DESCHLER-BROWN PRECEDENTS

THE SPEAKER: The gentleman will On May 9, 1940,(1) Mr. Clarence state it. Cannon, of Missouri, moved that MR. MACGREGOR: I should like to the House recede from its dis- ask the Speaker if the time for debate agreement to a Senate amend- on the motion of the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Mahon) is under the control ment to the agricultural appro- of the gentleman from Texas and if it priation bill of 1941 and concur is in order for me at this time to ask therein with an amendment which the gentleman from Texas to yield to he sent to the Clerk’s desk. Mr. me for 5 ? Malcolm C. Tarver, of Georgia, MR. MAHON: I have agreed to yield then offered a preferential motion to the gentleman from Minnesota for 5 that the House recede from its minutes for the purpose of debate. disagreement and concur in the MR. MACGREGOR: Am I recognized, Senate amendment, itself. The Mr. Speaker? question having been divided by THE SPEAKER: The gentleman from Texas will be recognized for 1 hour, request, the House entertained but the question before the House now the motion to recede. is on the motion of the gentleman from During the course of that de- Texas that the House recede from its bate, the following occurred: disagreement to the Senate amend- MR. [WILLIAM M.] WHITTINGTON [of ment. Mississippi]: Mr. Speaker, as I under- The Speaker having confirmed stand, there is 1 hour debate allowed Mr. Mahon’s control of the time on the motion to recede and concur. for debate, Mr. Mahon then yield- Request has been made for a division. My inquiry is this: Will there be 1 hour ed the floor to Mr. MacGregor for of debate on each motion? 5 minutes. THE SPEAKER: (2) The gentleman from Missouri [Mr. Cannon] controls § 52.12 Debate on a motion the time. If one is demanded on the that the House recede from motion to recede, that hour is granted. its disagreement to a Senate Then an hour will be granted on the amendment and concur in motion to concur. the same is under the hour MR. WHITTINGTON: That satisfies my rule, and if the question is inquiry. divided, the hour rule ap- Parliamentarian’s Note: Under plies to each motion sepa- Rule XXVIII clause 2(b)(1), debate rately, unless the previous on a motion to dispose of an question has been ordered 1. 86 CONG. REC. 5887, 5889, 76th on the motion prior to the di- Cong. 3d Sess. vision of the question. 2. William B. Bankhead (Ala.).

11798 VOTING Ch. 30 § 53 amendment in disagreement is di- other Member demands 20 min- vided between the and utes in opposition. See H. Res. 7, minority parties—or divided three ways if both floor managers are in 131 CONG. REC. 393, 99th Cong. support of the motion and if an- 1st Sess., Jan. 3, 1985.

E. POSTPONING VOTES; CLUSTERING VOTES; REDUCED VOTING TIME; SEPARATE VOTES § 53. Evolution of House Although the Speaker may not Rules on Postponement on his own volition and discretion and Reduced Voting reduce the times in which votes Time are taken with the electronic sys- tem, the House may authorize Introduction such action by The concepts of postponing or special order. votes, clustering a series of votes, and of reducing voting times were introduced into the rules by the The Development of the Speak- adoption of House Resolution 5 on er’s Postponement Authority the first day of the 96th Con- gress.(1) Amendments were made and Its Place in the Rules to Rules I, XV, XXIII, and § 53.1 In the 96th Congress, the XXVII.(2) The first instance where the Speaker utilized his new au- Speaker was given discre- thority to postpone a series of tionary authority to post- votes to another day occurred on pone record votes on the Feb. 21, 1979,(3) when the debate final passage of bills, the on a series of 10 committee fund- adoption of resolutions and ing resolutions was conducted but conference reports to a time where the votes were postponed certain within two legislative until Feb. 26, 1979.(4) days. In separate amend- ments to Rules XI and XXVII, 1. 125 CONG. REC. 7–10, 12, 13, 96th Cong. 1st Sess., Jan. 15, 1979. the authority to postpone 2. Id. at pp. 8, 9. and ‘‘cluster’’ votes on resolu- 3. 125 CONG. REC. 2906, 96th Cong. 1st tions reported from the Com- Sess. mittee on Rules and on mo- 4. Id. at pp. 3255, 3256. tions to suspend the rules 11799