Constitutional Amendments

Home , Discharge petition, Emanuel Celler

CHAPTER 34

A. Introduction § 1. In General § 2. Form of Action

B. House Consideration § 3. Committee Jurisdiction § 4. Procedures for Floor Consideration § 5. Voting

C. Senate Consideration; House-Senate Relations § 6. Senate Consideration § 7. Conference Reports § 8. Amendments Between the Houses

D. Ratification § 9. Generally; Certification and Publication § 10. Submission to the States; Records of Ratification § 11. State Consent; Withdrawal and Rescission of With- drawal § 12. Time Limits on Ratification

Commentary and editing by Wm. Holmes Brown, J.D., Ethan Lauer, J.D., Robert W. Cover, J.D., and Andrew S. Neal, J.D.; manuscript editing by Debo- rah Woodard Khalili.

VerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:45 Jan 25, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 8890 Sfmt 8890 F:\PRECEDIT\VOL17\17COMP~1 27-2A VerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:45 Jan 25, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 8890 Sfmt 8890 F:\PRECEDIT\VOL17\17COMP~1 27-2A Constitutional Amendments

A. Introduction § 1. In General held under Article V. This chapter therefore focuses on precedents re- Article V of the Constitution garding proposed constitutional provides as follows: amendments originating in the (2) ‘‘The Congress, whenever two Congress. thirds of both Houses shall deem Some States have submitted memo- it necessary, shall propose rials rescinding prior applications for Amendments to this Constitution, conventions. See, e.g. , 149 CONG. or, on the Application of the Leg- REC. 11131, 108th Cong. 1st Sess., islatures of two thirds of the sev- May 9, 2003 (memorial from Arizona eral States, shall call a Conven- rescinding all of the State’s previous tion for proposing Amendments, calls for a constitutional convention); 135 CONG. REC. 19782, 101st Cong. which, in either Case, shall be 1st Sess., Sept. 7, 1989 (memorial valid to all Intents and Purposes, from Alabama rescinding a previous as Part of this Constitution, when call for a constitutional convention to ratified by the Legislatures of propose an amendment requiring three fourths of the several that Federal spending not exceed es- States, or by Conventions in three timated Federal revenues). See also fourths thereof, as the one or the 145 CONG. REC. 18782, 106th Cong. other Mode of Ratification may be 1st Sess., July 30, 1999 (memorial from Oregon urging Congress to dis- proposed by the Congress;...’’ regard calls for a constitutional con- It is thus that the Constitution vention on the subject of a balanced provides the methods by which Federal budget out of concern that that governing document may be such a convention might intrude into amended. other constitutional revisions). Although States have from time 2. For discussion in the House on the method of amending the Constitu- to time submitted memorials re- tion by convention, see 76 CONG. questing a constitutional conven- REC. 124-134, 72d Cong. 2d Sess., tion for the purpose of discussing Dec. 7, 1932. See also hearing of the amendments on specified subject Subcommittee on the Constitution, matters,(1) no convention has been Committee on the Judiciary, Pro- posing an Amendment to the Con- 1. See, e.g. , 147 CONG. REC. 6129, stitution of the United States to Pro- 107th Cong. 1st Sess., Apr. 24, 2001. vide a Procedure by which the States

VerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:45 Jan 25, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 F:\PRECEDIT\VOL17\17COMP~1 27-2A Ch. 34 § 2 DESCHLER-BROWN-JOHNSON PRECEDENTS

§ 2. Form of Action the constitutional requirement of a two-thirds margin in each Proposals originating in the House for passage of such a joint Congress for amendments to the resolution, which has been in- Constitution are made in the form cluded in all joint resolutions pro- of joint resolutions, which have their several readings and, if posing constitutional amendments ( ) passed by both Houses, are en- that have been ratified. 3 rolled and signed by the presiding 3. See, e.g., H.J. Res. 27 of the 80th officers of the two Houses but are Congress, which became the 22d not presented to the President for Amendment, the resolving clause of ( ) approval. 1 which is set out at 93 CONG. REC. The form of the resolving clause 863, 80th Cong. 1st Sess., Feb. 6, for such a joint resolution is as 1947; S.J. Res 39 of the 86th Con- follows: gress, which became the 23d Amend- ment, the resolving clause of which Resolved by the Senate and House of is set out at 106 CONG. REC. 1257, Representatives of the United States of 86th Cong. 2d Sess., June 14, 1960; America in Congress assembled (two- S.J. Res. 29 of the 87th Congress, thirds of each House concurring there- which became the 24th Amendment, in), the resolving clause of which is set This adheres to the form for the out at 108 CONG. REC. 17655, 87th resolving clause for all joint reso- Cong. 2d Sess., Aug. 27, 1962; S.J. lutions(2) with the addition of the Res. 1 of the 89th Congress, which parenthetical phrase relating to became the 25th Amendment, the resolving clause of which is set out at may Propose Constitutional Amend- 111 CONG. REC. 7969, 89th Cong. 1st ments, Mar. 25, 1998 (regarding H.J. Sess., Apr. 13, 1965; and S.J. Res. 7 Res. 84, 105th Congress). of the 92d Congress, which became 1. House Rules and Manual § 191 the 26th Amendment, the resolving (2007). clause of which is set out at 111 2. See 1 USC § 102. CONG. REC. 7570, 89th Cong. 1st Sess., Mar. 23, 1971.

VerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:45 Jan 25, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 F:\PRECEDIT\VOL17\17COMP~1 27-2A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS Ch. 34 § 3

B. House Consideration § 3. Committee Jurisdic- In recent practice, jurisdiction tion in the House over joint resolutions proposing amendments to the Under Rule X clause 1,(1) juris- Constitution has been vested sole- diction in the House of Represent- ly in the Committee on the Judici- (5) atives over joint resolutions pro- ary. That committee also has ju- posing amendments to the Con- risdiction over memorials from stitution is vested in the Com- States either requesting the call- mittee on the Judiciary. That ju- ing of a constitutional convention or for the rescinding of such a re- risdiction was established by the (6) amendments to the standing rules quest. of the House made by the Legisla- f tive Reorganization Act of 1946.(2) Before the revisions to House § 3.1 Proposed amendment re- committee jurisdiction made by garding elections and terms that law, other committees had of office referred to former exercised jurisdiction over joint Committee on Election of the resolutions proposing amend- President, Vice President, ments to the Constitution,(3) and and Representatives in Con- the House on occasion had gress. changed the referral of such a res- On Mar. 29, 1933,(1) the Speak- olution from another committee to er referred to the Committee on the Committee on the Judiciary.(4) mittee on Ways and Means to the 1. House Rules and Manual § 729 Committee on the Judiciary. See 4 (2007). Hinds’ Precedents § 4056; 7 Cannon’s 2. 60 Stat. 812, 818, ch. 753, Aug. 2, Precedents § 1780. 1946. 5. See § 3.2, infra. 3. See § 3.1, infra. See also 4 Hinds’ 6. See examples in footnote 1 of § 1, Precedents § 4247 (former Com- supra. mittee on Labor reported a resolu- 1. H. Jour. p. 122 (1933). The Legisla- tion in 1884 proposing an amend- tive Reorganization Act of 1946 abol- ment to the Constitution limiting the ished the Committee on Election of hours of labor). the President, Vice President, and 4. In 1900, and again in 1932, the Representatives in Congress and House, by unanimous consent, re- vested the jurisdiction of that com- referred a joint resolution proposing mittee in the new Committee on an amendment to the Constitution House Administration. 60 Stat. 812, addressing taxation from the Com- 818, ch. 753, Aug. 2, 1946.

VerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:45 Jan 25, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 F:\PRECEDIT\VOL17\17COMP~1 27-2A Ch. 34 § 3 DESCHLER-BROWN-JOHNSON PRECEDENTS

Election of the President, Vice In the House Rules and Manual President, and Representatives in (1945), the annotations to that Congress a joint resolution pro- rule included the following: ‘‘The posing an amendment to the Con- committee [on the Judiciary] also stitution relating to the election of has general but not exclusive ju- the President and Vice President. risdiction over joint resolutions That committee reported the joint proposing amendments to the resolution to the House with an Constitution.’’(2) Thus it was that amendment on June 13, 1933.(2) most but not all joint resolutions proposing amendments to the § 3.2 In recent practice, all Constitution were referred to the joint resolutions proposing Committee on the Judiciary. amendments to the Constitu- Section 121(b) of the Legislative tion have been referred to Reorganization Act of 1946(3) the Committee on the Judici- amended Rule XI [now Rule X] to ary. read, in relevant part, as follows:

The Legislative Reorganization POWERS AND DUTIES OF COMMITTEES Act of 1946 reduced the number of (1) All proposed legislation, mes- standing committees of the House sages, petitions, memorials, and other from 48 to 19 and consolidated matters relating to the subjects listed and further delineated their juris- under the standing committees named diction. In so doing, the House below shall be referred to such commit- made express the jurisdiction of tees, respectively . . . the Committee on the Judiciary (l) Committee on the Judiciary. over the subject matter of con- 1. Judicial Proceedings, civil and criminal, generally. stitutional amendments. 2. Constitutional amendments. Before 1946, Rule XI [now Rule 3. Federal courts and judges. X] read, in relevant part, as follows: Parliamentarian’s Note: The practice since the enactment of POWERS AND DUTIES OF COMMITTEES. the Legislative Reorganization Act All proposed legislation shall be re- of 1946 has been to recognize sole ferred to the committees named in the jurisdiction in the Committee on preceding rule, as follows, viz, subjects the Judiciary over matters relat- relating . . . 4. To judicial proceedings, civil and ing to amendments to the Con- criminal law—to the Committee on the stitution, regardless of the subject Judiciary.(1) matter of a proposed amendment.

2. H.J. Res. 136 of the 73d Congress. 2. Id. at § 680. See also 4 Hinds’ Prece- See H. Jour. p. 421 (1933). dents § 4056. 1. House Rules and Manual §§ 675, 680 3. 60 Stat. 812, 818, ch. 753 (Aug. 2, (1945). 1946).

VerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:45 Jan 25, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 F:\PRECEDIT\VOL17\17COMP~1 27-2A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS Ch. 34 § 4

§ 4. Procedures for Floor Suspension of the Rules Consideration § 4.1 The joint resolution proposing the amendment to the The House has used a number Constitution that became the of procedures to consider joint res- 24th Amendment (abolishing olutions proposing amendments to the poll tax) was considered the Constitution. Most of the pro- by the House under suspen- cedures used for any other variety sion of the rules. of legislative measure have been On Aug. 27, 1962,(1) after the used, but special conditions have Journal had been read in full and been applied in some cir- four quorum calls had been com- cumstances. pleted or dispensed with by roll The House has considered joint call votes, Emanuel Celler, of New resolutions proposing amend- York, chairman of the Committee ments to the Constitution— on the Judiciary, moved that the (1) under suspension of the House suspend the rules and pass rules (under Rule XV clause 1),(1) a Senate joint resolution pro- (2) under a special order-of-busi- posing an amendment to the Con- ness resolution reported from the stitution. The motion and related Committee on Rules (pursuant to debate, particularly concerning Rule XIII clause 6(a)),(2) the propriety of the use of a mo- (3) pursuant to a motion to dis- tion for suspension of the rules for charge the Committee on the Ju- consideration of such a joint resolution, were as follows: diciary from further consideration of the joint resolution (pursuant to Mr. [Emanuel] CELLER [of New Rule XV clause 2),(3) and York]. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass Senate Joint Reso- (4) under a special order-of-busi- lution 29, proposing an amendment to ness resolution from which the the Constitution of the United States Committee on Rules has been dis- relating to qualifications of electors. charged (pursuant to Rule XV Mr. [Thomas Gerstle] ABERNETHY [of Mississippi]. Mr. Speaker, a point of (4) clause 2). order. The SPEAKER.(2) The gentleman 1. House Rules and Manual § 885 will state his point of order. (2007). 2. Id. at § 857. 1. 108 CONG. REC. 17654–70, 87th 3. Id. at § 892. Cong. 2d Sess. 4. Ibid. 2. John W. McCormack (MA).

VerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:45 Jan 25, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 F:\PRECEDIT\VOL17\17COMP~1 27-2A Ch. 34 § 4 DESCHLER-BROWN-JOHNSON PRECEDENTS

Mr. ABERNETHY. Mr. Speaker, I taken, and that I should be permitted make the point of order that this is to call up bills which are now pending District Day, that there are District on the calendar from the Committee on bills on the calendar, and as a member the District of Columbia. of the Committee on the District of Co- Mr. [Howard W.] SMITH of Vir- lumbia I respectfully demand recogni- (4) tion so that these bills may be consid- ginia. Mr. Speaker, I should like to ered. be heard on this point of order. Mr. [Carl] ALBERT [of Oklahoma].(3) The SPEAKER. The Chair will hear Mr. Speaker, may I be heard on the the gentleman. point of order? Mr. SMITH of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, The SPEAKER. The Chair is pre- the rules of the House on some things pared to rule, but the gentleman may are very clear, and the rules of the be heard. House either mean something or they Mr. ALBERT. Mr. Speaker, by unan- do not mean anything. imous consent, suspensions were trans- Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from ferred to this day, and under the rules the Speaker has power of recognition Mississippi [Mr. ABERNETHY], has just at his own discretion. called the Chair’s attention to clause 8 Mr. ABERNETHY. Mr. Speaker, I of Rule XXIV. Nothing could be more respectfully call the attention of the clear; nothing could be more manda- chairman to clause 8, rule XXIV, page tory. I want to repeat it because I hope 432 of the House Manual, which reads the Chair will not fall into an error on as follows; and I respectfully submit it this proposition: is a mandatory rule: The second and fourth Mondays in The second and fourth Mondays in each month, after the disposition of each month, after the disposition of motions to discharge committees and motions to discharge committees and after the disposal of such business after the disposal of such business on the Speaker’s table as requires on the Speaker’s table as requires reference only— reference only, shall, when claimed by the Committee on the District of And that is all; that is all that you Columbia, be set apart for the con- can consider—disposition of motions to sideration of such business as may discharge committees— be presented by said committee. and after the disposal of such busi- Mr. Speaker, I submit that rule is ness on the Speaker’s table as re- clear that when the time is claimed quires reference only— and the opportunity is claimed the That is all that the Chair is per- Chair shall permit those bills to be mitted to consider. considered. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, I respect- Mr. Speaker, after that is done the fully submit my point of order is well day—

3. Representative Albert was the Ma- 4. Representative Smith was chairman jority Leader. of the Committee on Rules.

VerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:45 Jan 25, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 F:\PRECEDIT\VOL17\17COMP~1 27-2A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS Ch. 34 § 4

shall, when claimed by the Com- today is a privileged motion. The mat- mittee on the District of Columbia, ter is within the discretion of the Chair be set apart for the consideration of as to the matter of recognition. such business as may be presented The Chair overrules the point of by said committee. order.(5) Mr. Speaker, I know the majority The Clerk read the resolution (S.J. leader bases his defense upon the the- Res. 29) as follows: ory that the House having given unan- Resolved by the Senate and House imous consent to hear suspensions on of Representatives of the United this Monday instead of last Monday States of America in Congress assem- when they should have been heard— bled (two-thirds of each House concurring therein), That the following and I doubt if very many Members article is hereby proposed as an were here when that consent order was amendment to the Constitution of made and I am quite sure that a great the United States, which shall be number of them had no notice that it valid to all intents and purposes as was going to be made, and certainly I part of the Constitution only if rati- did not—now the majority leader un- fied by the legislatures of three- fourths of the several States within dertakes to say that having gotten seven years from the date of its sub- unanimous consent to consider this mission by the Congress: motion on this day to suspend the rules, therefore, it gives the Speaker ‘‘ARTICLE— carte blanche authority to do away ‘‘SECTION 1. The right of citizens of with the rule which gives first consid- the United States to vote in a pri- eration to District of Columbia mat- mary or other election for President ters. or Vice President, for electors for President or Vice President, or for Mr. Speaker, there was no waiver of Senator or Representative in Con- the rule on the District of Columbia. gress, shall not be denied or That consent did not dispose or dis- abridged by the United States or any pense with the business on the District of Columbia day. The rule is com- 5. Parliamentarian’s Note: When more pletely mandatory. The rule says that than one Member seeks to call up on the second and fourth Mondays, if privileged business, it is within the the District of Columbia claims the discretion of the Speaker as to which time, that the Speaker shall recognize of those Members the Chair recog- them for such dispositions as they de- nizes. District of Columbia business sire to call. was privileged under Rule XXIV The SPEAKER. The Chair is pre- clause 8 [now Rule XV clause 4, pared to rule. House Rules and Manual § 894 Several days ago on August 14 unan- (2007)]. The motion to suspend the imous consent was obtained to transfer rules was equally privileged pursu- consideration of business under sus- ant to a unanimous-consent agree- pension of the rules on Monday last ment making suspensions in order until today. That does not prohibit the on that day [now in order on certain consideration of a privileged motion days under Rule XV clause 1, House and a motion to suspend the rules Rules and Manual § 885 (2007)].

VerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:45 Jan 25, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 F:\PRECEDIT\VOL17\17COMP~1 27-2A Ch. 34 § 4 DESCHLER-BROWN-JOHNSON PRECEDENTS

State by reason of failing to pay any Hall will never ring with the kind of a poll tax or other tax. farce that has been put on here today, ‘‘SEC. 2. The Congress shall have with the Constitution of the United power to enforce this article by ap- States to be amended, when no one can propriate legislation.’’... offer an objection or an amendment to The SPEAKER. The gentleman from it, when no one can raise his voice in New York [Mr. CELLER] is recognized extended debate, but 20 minutes for it for 20 minutes. and 20 minutes supposedly against it. Mr. CELLER.... It is unprecedented in the annals of I regret that this constitutional this Government for an amendment to amendment is brought up under sus- the Constitution, no matter how insig- pension of the rules with only 40 min- nificant it may be, to be considered (6) utes of debate. I applied for a rule. A under this procedure. rule was not forthcoming. A discharge . . . [T]his resolution could have petition was filed but not processed. been brought up here in the regular Such a petition is rarely used and has way. Some of you will remember that its attendant difficulties if not embar- just 18 months ago the leadership of rassments. Hence the suspension of this House packed the Committee on the rules.... Rules so that they would have a majority vote on it. They could have gotten Mr. [John V.] LINDSAY of New it out of the Committee on Rules with York. Mr. Speaker, I am very much op- a majority vote if they wanted to do it posed to poll taxes, and therefore I will in the democratic way and permit the vote for this bill, but I do so with a House to vote on it. Yet, this House is heavy heart. going to vote for this extraordinary sit- This is probably the greatest piece of uation, and they are going to do it political gamesmanship that has come under political pressure to please a mi- to the floor of the House in the 87th nority group.... Congress.... First of all, this is a Mr. HALLECK. Mr. Speaker, I do fantastic procedure under which to not want to get into any controversy amend the Constitution—an up or with any of my colleagues, but I just down vote, no amendments permitted, want it clearly stated for the record no motion to recommit possible, a total and understood that today is the reg- of 40 minutes of debate.... ular day for considering legislation The leadership on the majority side under suspension of the rules under who are running this show, Mr. Speak- the arrangement made last Monday; er, ought to be proud of themselves for handing us this dish of tea. Under this 6. Parliamentarian’s Note: A joint reso- kind of gag procedure they casually lution proposing an amendment to and cynically tinker with the U.S. Con- the Constitution had been considered stitution, for political reasons, to get by the House under a motion to sus- off the hook on civil rights.... pend the rules on at least one pre- Mr. SMITH of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, vious occasion. See 76 CONG. REC. 7, 4 minutes; 4 minutes. I have been here 12, 13, 72d Cong. 2d Sess., Dec. 5, a long time. I hope the walls of this 1932.

VerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:45 Jan 25, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 F:\PRECEDIT\VOL17\17COMP~1 27-2A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS Ch. 34 § 4

and so far as suspensions are con- DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: This will ac- cerned, it was within the province of knowledge your letter of June 14 re- the Speaker and the majority leader- questing that the Committee on Rules ship to schedule them, and that is schedule a hearing on Senate Joint what has been done.... Resolution 29, proposing an amend- Mr. [Seymour] HALPERN [of New ment to the Constitution of the United York].... States relating to qualifications of electors. Mr. Speaker, I would much prefer that the poll tax be outlawed by stat- I shall endeavor to schedule a hearing on this measure at the earliest pos- ute rather than by amendment to the sible time and shall be glad to advise Constitution, as this House has au- you when a date has been set. thorized five times previously. There is a big question as to the effectiveness of Sincerely, going the amendment route—obtaining HOWARD W. SMITH, approval of three-fourths of the State Chairman. legislatures is a long, difficult, and te- If the gentleman from Virginia and dious process, to say the least. others are interested and do not want We are now, however, faced with no the Constitution amended, or us to other alternative under the rule and have an opportunity to say how it the circumstances here today but to should be amended, why did he not, support this constitutional amend- upon the request of the chairman of ment. Despite the question of the effec- this committee grant a rule so that we tiveness of this method, I definitely could come in here and discuss it in shall support this Senate joint resolu- every particular? . . . tion.... Mr. ABERNETHY.... Mr. [Byron Giles] ROGERS of Colo- There are resolutions and bills which rado. Mr. Speaker, I regret that the may be properly and satisfactorily con- gentleman from Virginia should say sidered under a time limitation of 40 that we were placed under a gag rule, minutes as the rule under which we that we could not present the matter are now operating provides. There are to the House so that this constitutional resolutions and bills of such simple proposal could be amended. I want to character that amendments thereto direct attention to and read a letter would be unworthy. But, Mr. Speaker, indeed a resolution which has the ef- from the gentleman from Virginia, ad- fect of changing, altering, amending, dressed to the chairman of our com- defacing, or whatever you may call it, mittee, which reads as follows: the Constitution of our great country HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, U.S., should never be submitted to and COMMITTEE ON RULES swept through this House in such a Washington, D.C., June 15, 1962. ruthless and tornado-like fashion. Hon. EMANUEL CELLER, What a terrible precedent.... Chairman, Committee on the Judici- Mr. John Bell WILLIAMS [of Mis- ary, sissippi]. Mr. Speaker, this is a sad House Office Building, Washington, day for those who believe in constitu- D.C. tional government. It is a sadder day

VerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:45 Jan 25, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 F:\PRECEDIT\VOL17\17COMP~1 27-2A Ch. 34 § 4 DESCHLER-BROWN-JOHNSON PRECEDENTS

for those who believe in representative Mr. ABERNETHY. Mr. Speaker, I government and those who have had demand the yeas and nays. faith in the House of Representatives The yeas and nays were ordered. and its historical tradition of justice. The question was taken; and there Under the current suspension proce- were—yeas 294, nays 86, answered dure which we are operating today, we ‘‘present’’ 1, not voting 54, as follows: are considering a far-reaching amendment to the Constitution in only 40 [Roll No. 202] . . . minutes. So (two-thirds having voted in favor The U.S. Constitution will be 175 thereof) the rules were suspended and years old on September 17. During the joint resolution was passed. that time, the Congress and the respective States have amended it only § 4.2 When the House consid- 23 times. Nevertheless, the leadership ered a joint resolution pro- of this body, in the New Frontier tradition of running roughshod over those posing a constitutional who disagree, has taken the unusual amendment under a motion step of limiting debate on such a his- to suspend the rules, a Mem- torical step to less than an hour. What ber objected to various unan- will future generations think of such behavior?... imous-consent requests asso- Mr. [Joseph P.] ADDABBO [of New ciated with such consider- York]. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of ation (namely, to revise and Senate Joint Resolution 29, a constitu- extend remarks). tional amendment to abolish the poll (1) tax. On Nov. 15, 1983, as the Although I believe a serious question House was considering under a involving an amendment to the Con- motion to suspend the rules a stitution should be brought up under joint resolution proposing an the regular order of the House and suf- amendment to the Constitution, ficient time be given for debate and Mr. Robert S. Walker, of Pennsyl- amendment, to fully protect the rights of all voters. It is our responsibility vania, objected to a request of the when such process is stopped by the manager of the joint resolution for power of one man and a small minority unanimous consent to revise and to take this action to protect the right extend his remarks and an- of all qualified to vote, even though nounced his intention to object to under present laws only a few may be all similar unanimous-consent re- denied this right because of a poll tax.... quests for the duration of the de- The SPEAKER. The time of the gen- bate on that measure. tleman from Colorado has expired; all The proceedings were as fol- time has expired. lows: The question is, Will the House suspend the rules and pass the resolution, 1. 129 CONG. REC. 32668, 98th Cong. Senate Joint Resolution 29? 1st Sess.

VerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:45 Jan 25, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 F:\PRECEDIT\VOL17\17COMP~1 27-2A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS Ch. 34 § 4

Mr. [Peter W.] RODINO [of New Jer- Mr. RODINO. Mr. Speaker, I ask sey]. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend unanimous consent to revise and ex- the rules and pass the joint resolution tend my remarks. (H.J. Res. 1) proposing an amendment The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there to the Constitution of the United objection to the request of the gen- States relative to equal rights for men tleman from New Jersey? and women. Mr. WALKER. Mr. Speaker, I re- The Clerk read as follows: serve the right to object. H.J. RES. 1 The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Pennsylvania reserves Resolved by the Senate and House the right to object. of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assem- Mr. WALKER. Mr. Speaker, I re- bled (two-thirds of both Houses con- serve the right to object, because a curring therein), That the following process was determined here and the article is proposed as an amendment process says that there is going to be to the Constitution of the United 20 minutes for the entire case to be States of America, which shall be made. There are many of us in this valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when rati- House who feel that that was not an fied by the legislatures of three- appropriate kind of a decision to be fourths of the several States within made. seven years from the date of its sub- So therefore, I am reserving the mission by the Congress: right to object to tell the Members that I am going to object to all unanimous- ‘‘ARTICLE— consent requests, both to revise and ‘‘SECTION 1. Equality of rights extend remarks, as well as for the pur- under the law shall not be denied or pose of getting general leave, so that abridged by the United States or by the entire debate on this matter will any State on account of sex. take place on the Democratic side ‘‘SECTION 2. The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appro- within the 20 minutes allotted. priate legislation, the provisions of Mr. Speaker, I do object. this article. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Objec- ‘‘SECTION 3. This article shall take tion is heard. effect two years after the date of ratification.’’. Despite Mr. Walker’s announced The SPEAKER pro tempore.(2) Pur- intent to object to all such re- suant to the rule, a second is not requests, the Speaker himself was quired on this motion. granted leave to revise and extend The gentleman from New Jersey his remarks made from the floor (Mr. RODINO) will be recognized for 20 during debate,(3) and other Mem- minutes and the gentleman from Wis- bers obtained individual permis- consin (Mr. SENSENBRENNER) will be recognized for 20 minutes. sion to insert remarks in the de- The Chair now recognizes the gen- bate. tleman from New Jersey (Mr. RODINO). 3. 129 CONG. REC. 32675, 98th Cong. 2. James C. Wright, Jr. (TX). 1st Sess.

VerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:45 Jan 25, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 F:\PRECEDIT\VOL17\17COMP~1 27-2A Ch. 34 § 4 DESCHLER-BROWN-JOHNSON PRECEDENTS

Mr. RODINO. Mr. Speaker, I yield motion garding House Joint Resolution the balance of the time to the distin- 1 made by the gentleman from Cali- guished Speaker of the House, the gen- fornia (Mr. PANETTA) be vacated. tleman from Massachusetts (Mr. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there O’NEILL). objection to the request of the gen- (Mr. O’NEILL asked and was given tleman from Pennsylvania? permission to revise and extend his re- There was no objection. marks.) Mr. [Thomas P.] O’NEILL, [Jr., of Special Rule Massachusetts]. I rise in support of the resolution.... § 4.3 The House may consider Later the same day,(4) after de- a joint resolution proposing bate had concluded and the House an amendment to the Con- had moved on to other business, stitution pursuant to a spe- Mr. Leon E. Panetta, of Cali- cial order-of-business resolu- fornia, obtained, by unanimous tion reported by the Com- consent, general leave for all mittee on Rules, and such an Members to revise and extend order-of-business resolution their remarks on the joint resolu- may provide for an amend- tion: ment in the nature of a sub- Mr. PANETTA. Mr. Speaker, I ask stitute to the joint resolution unanimous consent that all Members to be considered in the may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks on House House. Joint Resolution 1. On June 3, 2003,(1) the House The SPEAKER pro tempore.(5) Is considered, pursuant to a special there objection to the request of the rule, a joint resolution proposing gentleman from California? There was no objection. an amendment to the Constitution addressing physical desecration of Still later the same day, the the flag. The proceedings were as order obtained by Rep. Panetta follows: was vacated by unanimous consent at the request of Rep. Walk- Mr. [John] LINDER [of Georgia]. Mr. er:(6) Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution Mr. WALKER. Mr. Speaker, I ask 255 and ask for its immediate consid- unanimous consent that the eration. The Clerk read the resolution, as fol- 4. Id. at p. 32719. lows: 5. Ronald Coleman (TX). 6. 129 CONG. REC. 32746, 98th Cong. 1. 149 CONG. REC. 13492, 13497, 108th 1st Sess., Nov. 15, 1983. Cong. 1st Sess.

VerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:45 Jan 25, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 F:\PRECEDIT\VOL17\17COMP~1 27-2A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS Ch. 34 § 4

H. RES. 255 This rule provides for 2 hours of de- Resolved, That upon the adoption bate in the House, equally divided and of this resolution it shall be in order controlled by the chairman and rank- without intervention of any point of ing minority member of the Committee order to consider in the House the on the Judiciary. House Resolution 255 joint resolution (H.J. Res. 4) pro- waives all points of order against con- posing an amendment to the Con- stitution of the United States au- sideration of the joint resolution. thorizing the Congress to prohibit It makes in order an amendment in the physical desecration of the flag of the nature of a substitute, if offered by the United States. The joint resolu- the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. tion shall be considered as read for amendment. The previous question CONYERS) or his designee, which shall shall be considered as ordered on the be separately debatable for 1 hour, joint resolution and on any amend- equally divided between the proponent ment thereto to final passage with- and an opponent. out intervening motion except: (1) two hours of debate on the joint reso- Finally, this rule provides for one lution equally divided and controlled motion to recommit, with or without by the chairman and ranking minor- instructions.... ity member of the Committee on the Mr. Speaker, I yield back the bal- Judiciary; (2) an amendment in the nature of a substitute offered by ance of my time, and I move the pre- Representative Conyers of Michigan vious question on the resolution. or his designee, which shall be con- The previous question was ordered. sidered as read and shall be sepa- The resolution was agreed to. rately debatable for one hour equally divided and controlled by the pro- A motion to reconsider was laid on ponent and an opponent;(2) and (3) the table.(4) one motion to recommit with or without instructions. § 4.4 A special order-of-busi- The SPEAKER pro tempore.(3) The ness resolution may provide gentleman from Georgia (Mr. LINDER) for a joint resolution pro- is recognized for 1 hour. Mr. LINDER. . . . posing a constitutional Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 255 amendment to be considered is a modified closed rule that provides in the Committee of the for the consideration of H.J. Resolution 4, legislation proposing an amendment Whole, may make in order to the Constitution of the United States authorizing the Congress to pro- 4. The House proceeded to consider the hibit the physical desecration of the joint resolution and, after rejecting American flag. the amendment in the nature of a substitute offered by a designee of 2. Parliamentarian’s Note: The rule did Mr. Conyers, passed the joint resolu- not specify the text of the amend- tion by a vote of 300–125. 149 CONG. ment permitted under the rule, nor REC. 13497–524, 108th Cong. 1st did it waive any points of order Sess., June 3, 2003. The Senate took against the amendment. no action on the House-passed joint 3. Lee Terry (NE). resolution.

VerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:45 Jan 25, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 F:\PRECEDIT\VOL17\17COMP~1 27-2A Ch. 34 § 4 DESCHLER-BROWN-JOHNSON PRECEDENTS

more than one amendment in solve itself into the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the the nature of a substitute to Union for the consideration of the the joint resolution, and may joint resolution (H.J. Res. 350) pro- provide that, if more than posing an amendment to the Con- stitution altering Federal budget one such amendment is procedures, and the first reading of adopted, only the last such the joint resolution shall be dispensed with. After general debate, amendment adopted shall be which shall be confined to the joint reported to the House. resolution and to the amendments ( ) made in order by this resolution and On Oct. 1, 1982, 1 the House shall continue not to exceed two considered a special order-of-busi- hours, to be equally divided and con- ness resolution reported by the trolled by a Member in favor of the joint resolution and a Member op- Committee on Rules providing for posed, the joint resolution shall be consideration in the Committee of considered as having been read for the Whole of a joint resolution amendment under the five-minute proposing an amendment to the rule. No amendment to the joint resolution shall be in order in the Constitution regarding the Fed- House or in the Committee of the eral budget process and making in Whole except the following amend- order two amendments in the na- ments which shall be considered only ture of a substitute to the joint in the following order and which shall not be subject to amendment resolution. but shall be debatable as provided Mr. [Richard] BOLLING [of Mis- herein: souri]. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the (1) an amendment in the nature of Committee on Rules, I call up House a substitute printed in the Congres- Resolution 604 and ask for its imme- sional Record of September 30, 1982, diate consideration. by, and if offered by, Representative The Clerk read the resolution, as fol- Alexander of Arkansas, and said lows: amendment shall be debatable for not to exceed one hour, to be equally H. RES. 604 divided and controlled by Represent- ative Alexander and a Member op- Resolved, That upon adoption of posed thereto; and this resolution the House shall re- (2) an amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting only of the 1. 128 CONG. REC. 27172, 27178, 97th text of H.J. Res. 350 as introduced if Cong. 2d Sess. For a similar special offered by Representative Conable of order-of-business resolution pro- New York, and said amendment shall be debatable for not to exceed viding for five amendments in the one hour, to be equally divided and nature of a substitute, see 138 CONG. controlled by Representative Conable REC. 14225–359, 102d Cong. 2d and a Member opposed thereto, and Sess., June 10, 1992. For more infor- said amendment shall be in order mation on this type of amendment even if the amendment designated (1) above has been adopted. At the procedure, sometimes informally re- conclusion of the consideration of the ferred to as ‘‘king of the hill,’’ see Ch. joint resolution for amendment, the 30 § 58.5, supra. Committee shall rise and report the

VerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:45 Jan 25, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 F:\PRECEDIT\VOL17\17COMP~1 27-2A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS Ch. 34 § 4

joint resolution to the House, but Parliamentarian’s Note: During only the last amendment adopted shall be considered as having been consideration of H.J. Res. 350 pur- finally adopted and reported back to suant to H. Res. 604, the first the House. The previous question amendment in the nature of a shall be considered as ordered on the joint resolution and on the amend- substitute that was made in order ment if adopted to final passage under the rule was not adopted, without intervening motion except one motion to recommit. and so the second one, which con- SEC. 2. The resolution (H. Res. tained the same text as the under- 450) providing for the consideration lying joint resolution, was not of- of the joint resolution (H.J. Res. 350) proposing an amendment to the Con- fered. The joint resolution then stitution altering Federal budget failed to receive the requisite two- procedures is hereby laid on the thirds majority for passage.(3) table.(2) ... Mr. BOLLING.... § 4.5 A special order-of-busi- Mr. Speaker, I move the previous ness resolution providing for question on the resolution. The previous question was ordered. consideration of a House The resolution was agreed to. joint resolution proposing a A motion to reconsider was laid on constitutional amendment the table. may also discharge a House 2. Parliamentarian’s Note: H. Res. 450 committee from consider- was the object of a discharge petition ation of a similar Senate that on Sept. 29, 1982, had received joint resolution and make in the requisite number of signatures order a motion to amend the for floor consideration. That resolu- Senate measure with the text tion provided for consideration of H.J. Res. 350 and precluded consid- of the House joint resolution eration of any amendments to that as passed by the House. joint resolution. H. Res. 604 was re- The proceedings of Apr. 13, ported by the Committee on Rules to (1) provide for consideration of that joint 1965, are illustrative of this resolution under procedures allowing proposition: consideration of a specified amendment in the nature of a substitute. 3. 128 CONG. REC. 27254, 27255, 97th And, in order to provide a vote that Cong. 2d Sess., Oct. 1, 1982. would be the equivalent of pro- 1. 111 CONG. REC. 7931, 89th Cong. 1st ceeding under the discharge process, Sess. A special order-of-business res- H. Res. 604 made in order an olution also may prospectively make amendment consisting of the under- in order a motion by a Member to lying text of H.J. Res. 350 that consider a comparable joint resolu- would be in order even if the first tion if passed by the Senate and, if amendment in the nature of a sub- necessary, to move to strike all after stitute were adopted. the resolving clause of the Senate

VerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:45 Jan 25, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 F:\PRECEDIT\VOL17\17COMP~1 27-2A Ch. 34 § 4 DESCHLER-BROWN-JOHNSON PRECEDENTS

Mr. [John A.] YOUNG [of Texas]. H.J. Res. 1, the Committee on the Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Com- Judiciary shall be discharged from mittee on Rules, I call up House Reso- further consideration of S.J. Res. 1, lution 314 and ask for its immediate and it shall then be in order in the consideration. House to move to strike out all after The Clerk read as follows: the resolving clause of said Senate joint resolution and to insert the pro- HOUSE RESOLUTION 314 visions of H.J. Res. 1 as passed by the House. Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution it shall be in order Parliamentarian’s Note: Fol- to move that the House resolve itself lowing adoption of H. Res. 314, into the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union for the House proceeded to consider the consideration of the resolution H.J. Res. 1. After agreeing to an (H.J. Res. 1) proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the amendment adopted by the Com- United States relating to succession mittee of the Whole and rejecting to the Presidency and Vice-Presi- a motion to recommit, the House dency and to cases where the Presi- dent is unable to discharge the pow- passed the measure by a vote of ers and duties of his office. After 386–29. Immediately following general debate, which shall be confined to the resolution and shall con- that vote, the manager of the res- tinue not to exceed four hours, to be olution called up S.J. Res. 1 for equally divided and controlled by the immediate consideration, as made chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on the Ju- in order by the rule, and offered diciary, the resolution shall be read an amendment to strike the text for amendment under the five- minute rule. At the conclusion of of the Senate measure and insert such consideration the Committee the text of H.J. Res. 1 as passed shall rise and report the resolution by the House. The amendment to the House with such amendments as may have been adopted, and any was adopted by a voice vote and member may demand a separate then the Senate joint resolution, vote in the House on any of the amendments adopted in the Com- as amended by the House, was mittee of the Whole to the resolution passed by the House. The vote on or committee substitute. The pre- passage, although a voice vote, vious question shall be considered as ordered on the resolution and carried with two-thirds of those amendments to final passage with- voting having voted in the affirm- out intervening motion except one (2) motion to recommit, with or without ative. instructions. After the passage of § 4.6 Where a special order-of- joint resolution and substitute the business resolution provided text of the House-passed joint resolu- that general debate on a tion therefor. See 138 CONG. REC. 14225, 102d Cong. 2d Sess., June 10, 2. 111 CONG. REC. 7968, 7969, 89th 1992 [H. Res. 450]. Cong. 1st Sess., Apr. 13, 1965.

VerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:45 Jan 25, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 F:\PRECEDIT\VOL17\17COMP~1 27-2A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS Ch. 34 § 4

joint resolution proposing an Committee of the Whole accorded amendment to the Constitu- the time in favor of the joint reso- tion be divided between a lution to the ranking minority Member in favor and a Mem- member of the committee of juris- ber opposed, and the joint diction and the time opposed to ( ) resolution had not been re- the chairman of that committee. 2 ported from committee, the The SPEAKER.(3) Pursuant to the Chairman of the Committee provisions of House Resolution 604, the of the Whole recognized the House resolves itself into the Com- mittee of the Whole House of the State ranking minority member of of the Union for the consideration of the committee of jurisdiction the joint resolution (H.J. Res. 350) pro- to control the time in favor posing an amendment to the Constitu- and the chairman of that tion altering Federal budget procedures. committee to control the time in opposition. IN THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE After the House had adopted a Accordingly the House resolved itself special order-of-business resolu- into the Committee of the Whole tion providing for consideration of House on the State of the Union for a joint resolution proposing an the consideration of the joint resolution, House Joint Resolution 350, with amendment to the Constitution Mr. [Edward Patrick] BOLAND [of Mas- regarding Federal budget proce- sachusetts] in the chair. dures where the joint resolution The Clerk read the title of the joint had not been reported by the com- resolution. mittee to which it had been re- The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the ferred (the Committee on the Ju- rule, the first reading of the joint reso- diciary) and where the special lution is dispensed with. order-of-business resolution speci- Is the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. fied that time for general debate McCLORY) in favor of the joint resolu- would be divided between a Mem- tion? Mr. [Robert] McCLORY.(4) Mr. ber in favor and a Member op- Chairman, yes, I favor House Joint posed to the unreported joint reso- Resolution 350. lution (as opposed to specifying The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman that time for general debate qualifies. would be divided between the chairman and ranking minority 2. 128 CONG. REC. 27178, 27179, 97th member of the committee of juris- Cong. 2d Sess., Oct. 1, 1982. diction),(1) the Chairman of the 3. Thomas P. O’Neill, Jr. (MA). 4. Mr. McClory was the ranking minor- 1. For the text of this special order-of- ity member of the Committee on the business resolution, see § 4.4, supra. Judiciary.

VerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:45 Jan 25, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 F:\PRECEDIT\VOL17\17COMP~1 27-2A Ch. 34 § 4 DESCHLER-BROWN-JOHNSON PRECEDENTS

Is the gentleman from New Jersey was the primary sponsor of (Mr. RODINO) opposed to the joint reso- the measure. lution? ( ) Mr. [Peter W.] RODINO, [Jr.].(5) I On June 10, 1992, 1 the House am opposed, Mr. Chairman. proceeded to consider a joint reso- The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman lution proposing an amendment to qualifies. the Constitution pursuant to the The gentleman from Illinois (Mr. terms of a special order-of-busi- McCLORY) will be recognized for 1 hour, and the gentleman from New ness resolution. The special order- Jersey (Mr. RODINO) will be recognized of-business resolution had been for 1 hour. introduced by Mr. Charles W. The Chair now recognizes the gen- Stenholm, of Texas, and was the tleman from Illinois (Mr. McCLORY).(6) object of a successful discharge petition filed by him. The resolution § 4.7 Where a special order-of- provided for general debate on the business resolution pro- joint resolution in the Committee viding for consideration of a of the Whole to be divided among joint resolution proposing an three named Members, the chair- amendment to the Constitu- man and ranking minority mem- tion divided control of time ber of the Committee on the Judi- for general debate among ciary and Mr. Stenholm, the pri- three named Members, the mary sponsor of the joint resolu- Chair determined that rec- tion under consideration. Al- ognition for the purpose of though the Chair ordinarily recog- closing debate would be ac- nizes Members to close general corded to the Member who debate in the reverse order of opening, in this case the Chair- 5. Mr. Rodino was the chairman of the man of the Committee of the Committee on the Judiciary. Whole nevertheless determined 6. Although in this case a member of that the right to close general de- the majority controlled the time for bate in this circumstance would general debate in opposition to the be accorded to Mr. Stenholm, the joint resolution and a member of the primary proponent of the meas- minority controlled the time in favor, a member of the minority who was ure. opposed to the joint resolution never- Proceedings were as follows: theless had priority of recognition to Mr. STENHOLM. Mr. Speaker, pur- offer a motion to recommit, in ac- suant to the unanimous consent agree- cordance with the general rules ap- ment offered by the gentleman from plicable to motions to recommit. 128 CONG. REC. 27254, 27255, 97th 1. 138 CONG. REC. 14225, 102d Cong. Cong. 2d Sess., Oct. 1, 1982. 2d Sess.

VerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:45 Jan 25, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 F:\PRECEDIT\VOL17\17COMP~1 27-2A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS Ch. 34 § 4

Missouri (Mr. GEPHARDT) and the sissippi). Pursuant to House Resolution order of the House of Thursday, June 450, the Chair declares the House in 4, 1992, I call up the resolution (H. the Committee of the Whole House on Res. 450) providing for the consider- the State of the Union for the consideration of the joint resolution (H.J. Res. ation of the joint resolution, House 290) proposing an amendment to the Joint Resolution 290. Constitution to provide for a balanced budget for the U.S. Government and b 1255 for greater accountability in the enactment of tax legislation, and ask for its IN THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE immediate consideration. Accordingly the House resolved itself H. RES. 450 into the Committee of the Whole Resolved, That immediately upon House on the State of the Union for the adoption of this resolution the the consideration of the joint resolu- House shall resolve itself into the tion, House Joint Resolution 290, pro- Committee of the Whole House on posing an amendment to the Constitu- the State of the Union for the consid- tion to provide for a balanced budget eration of the joint resolution (H.J. Res. 290) proposing an amendment for the U.S. Government and for great- to the Constitution to provide for a er accountability in the enactment of balanced budget for the United tax legislation, with Mr. [RAYMOND States Government and for greater HOYT] THORNTON [Jr., of Arkansas] in accountability in the enactment of the chair. tax legislation, all points of order against the joint resolution and The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the against its consideration are hereby rule, the joint resolution is considered waived, and the first reading of the as having been read the first time. joint resolution shall be dispensed Pursuant to the order of the House with. After general debate, which of Thursday, June 4, 1992, the gen- shall be confined to the joint resolution and which shall not exceed four tleman from Texas [Mr. BROOKS], or and one-half hours, to be equally di- his designee, the gentleman from Mis- vided and controlled by Representa- souri [Mr. GEPHARDT], will be recog- tive Brooks of Texas, Representative nized for 3 hours;(3) the gentleman Fish, of New York, and Representa- from New York [Mr. FISH] will be rec- tive Stenholm of Texas, or their designees, the joint resolution shall be ognized for 3 hours; and the gentleman considered for amendment under the from Texas [Mr. STENHOLM] will be five-minute rule.... 3. In the order of the House entered Following adoption of the reso- into pursuant to the unanimous-con- lution, the House resolved into the sent agreement providing for consid- Committee of the Whole to con- eration of H. Res. 450, time for gen- ( ) sider the joint resolution. 2 eral debate on H.J. Res. 290 was in- The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. creased from the four and one-half [G.V. (Sonny)] MONTGOMERY (of Mis- hours specified in the resolution to nine hours. 138 CONG. REC. 13617, 2. 138 CONG. REC. 14235, 102d Cong. 13618, 102d Cong. 2d Sess., June 4, 2d Sess. 1992.

VerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:45 Jan 25, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 F:\PRECEDIT\VOL17\17COMP~1 27-2A Ch. 34 § 4 DESCHLER-BROWN-JOHNSON PRECEDENTS

recognized for 3 hours. The Chair will ject of a discharge petition, attempt to rotate recognition in a man- as in the case of any other ner mutually agreeable to the man- agers. measure, and a discharge pe- The Chair recognizes the gentleman tition with respect to such a from Missouri (MR. GEPHARDT).(4). joint resolution need garner only 218 signatures, a major- Richard M. Gephardt, of Mis- souri, the Majority Leader, was ity of the total membership the designee of Mr. Jack Brooks, of the House, as in the case of Texas, the chairman of the of any other measure. Committee on the Judiciary, and Following the introduction of a was recognized first for general joint resolution proposing an debate in the Committee of the amendment to the Constitution Whole. Following the expiration of and after the completion of the the debate time for Mr. Brooks requisite period of time, Mr. and Mr. Hamilton Fish, Jr., of Chalmers P. Wylie, of Ohio, filed New York, the ranking minority a discharge petition on the meas- member of the Committee on the ure pursuant to Rule XXVII (1) Judiciary, the Chairman recog- clause 3. The discharge petition nized Mr. Stenholm to close de- received the requisite number of signatures on Sept. 21, 1971.(2) bate. The motion was as follows: The CHAIRMAN pro tempore.(5) ... MOTION TO DISCHARGE COMMITTEE The Chair recognizes the gentleman APRIL 1, 1971. from Texas (Mr. STENHOLM) to close debate.(6) To the CLERK OF THE HOUSE OF REP- RESENTATIVES: Discharge Petition With Re- Pursuant to clause 4 of rule XXVII(3) spect to Joint Resolution Pro- I, CHALMERS P. WYLIE, move to dis- posing an Amendment to the charge the Committee on the Judiciary Constitution 1. This rule was later renumbered as Rule XV clause 2, House Rules and § 4.8 A joint resolution pro- Manual § 892 (2007). posing an amendment to the 2. 117 CONG. REC. 32576, 32577, 92d Constitution may be the ob- Cong. 1st Sess. 3. Parliamentarian’s Note: During its 4. Id. at p. 14235. deliberations preparatory to the con- 5. Kweisi Mfume (MD). vening of the 98th Congress (1983- 6. 117 CONG. REC. 14331, 102d Cong. 85) with respect to changes to the 2d Sess. standing rules of the House for that

VerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:45 Jan 25, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 F:\PRECEDIT\VOL17\17COMP~1 27-2A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS Ch. 34 § 4

from the consideration of the joint res- resentatives affix their signatures, to olution (H.J. Res. 191) entitled ‘‘A joint wit: resolution proposing an amendment to 1. Chalmers P. Wylie. the Constitution of the United States 2. John E. Hunt.... with respect to the offering of prayer in 217. Floyd V. Hicks. public buildings,’’ which was referred 218. Charles J. Carney. to said committee January 22, 1971, in support of which motion the undersigned Members of the House of Rep- § 4.9 Upon adoption of a motion to discharge a com- Congress, the Democratic Caucus mittee from consideration of (the majority membership for that a public bill or resolution (in- Congress) considered and rejected a cluding a joint resolution change to the House rules to provide proposing an amendment to that, with respect to any joint resolution proposing an amendment to the the Constitution) following Constitution, two-thirds of the House the securing of the requisite membership (rather than a majority) number of signatures on a would be the requisite number for discharge petition, a motion signatures on a discharge petition, to proceed to the immediate as well as for adoption of a special consideration of the measure order-of-business resolution providing for consideration of such a is privileged, if made by a joint resolution. On Jan. 3, 1983, the Member who signed the dis- date of the convening of the 98th charge petition, and is de- Congress, the Majority Leader, cided without debate. James C. Wright, Jr. [TX], in ex- (1) plaining to the House the proposed On Nov. 8, 1971, Speaker Carl changes in the standing rules rec- Albert, of Oklahoma, recognized a ommended by the majority party signatory to a successful discharge (2) caucus, made the following state- petition to move to discharge ment: ‘‘I should announce at the out- the Committee on the Judiciary set for the benefit of any of those from further consideration of a who are unfamiliar with the fact joint resolution proposing an that [an additional] change was con- amendment to the Constitution. sidered by the Democratic Cau- The proceedings were as fol- cus.... That proposal which was lows: omitted was the one which would have required that two-thirds of the PRAYER AMENDMENT Members should have the requisite Mr. [Chalmers P.] WYLIE [of Ohio]. signatures on a discharge petition in Mr. Speaker, pursuant to clause 4, rule order to discharge a constitutional amendment from the committee of 1. 117 CONG. REC. 39885, 39886, 92d jurisdiction.’’ 129 CONG. REC. 35, Cong. 1st Sess. 98th Cong. 1st Sess. 2. See § 4.8, supra.

VerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:45 Jan 25, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 F:\PRECEDIT\VOL17\17COMP~1 27-2A Ch. 34 § 4 DESCHLER-BROWN-JOHNSON PRECEDENTS

XXVII,(3) I call up motion No. 1 to dis- The SPEAKER. The Clerk will re- charge the Committee on the Judiciary port the joint resolution. from the further consideration of The Clerk read the joint resolution House Joint Resolution 191, a proposed as follows: amendment to the Constitution of the United States relative to the offering of H.J. RES. 191 prayer in public buildings. Joint resolution proposing an amend- The SPEAKER. Did the gentleman ment to the Constitution of the sign the motion? United States with respect to the Mr. WYLIE. Yes, Mr. Speaker, I offering of prayer in public build- signed the motion. ings The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Resolved by the Senate and House Ohio calls up a motion to discharge the of Representatives of the United Committee on the Judiciary from the States of America in Congress assem- further consideration of the joint reso- bled (two-thirds of each House con- lution (H.J. Res. 191) which the Clerk curring therein), That the following will report by title. article is hereby proposed as an amendment to the Constitution of The Clerk read the title of the joint the United States, which shall be resolution.... valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when rati- f fied by the legislatures of three- fourths of the several States: PRAYER AMENDMENT ‘‘ARTICLE— The SPEAKER. Under the rule, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. WYLIE) will ‘‘SECTION 1. Nothing contained in be recognized for 10 minutes, and the this Constitution shall abridge the right of persons lawfully assembled, gentleman from New York (Mr. in any public building which is sup- CELLER) will be recognized for 10 min- ported in whole or in part through utes. the expenditure of public funds, to participate in nondenominational The motion to discharge was de- prayer. bated and agreed to. The Speaker ‘‘SEC. 2. This article shall be inop- then recognized the same Member erative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the to offer a motion that the House Constitution by the legislatures of proceed to consider the measure.(4) three-fourths of the several States within seven years from the date of Mr. WYLIE. Mr. Speaker, pursuant its submission to the States by the to the provisions of clause 4, rule Congress.’’ XXVII, I move that the House now proceed to the immediate consideration of The SPEAKER. The question is on House Joint Resolution 191. the motion offered by the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. WYLIE). 3. Now Rule XV clause 2, House Rules The motion was agreed to. and Manual § 892 (2007). 4. 117 CONG. REC. 39889, 92d Cong. 2d § 4.10 A joint resolution pro- Sess., Nov. 8, 1971. posing an amendment to the 24

VerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:45 Jan 25, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 F:\PRECEDIT\VOL17\17COMP~1 27-2A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS Ch. 34 § 4

Constitution is considered in order of the House of June 28, 1979, I the House, not in the Com- move that the House proceed to the immediate consideration of House mittee of the Whole, when Joint Resolution 74. considered in consequence of The SPEAKER.(3) The question is on a discharge petition. the motion offered by the gentleman On July 24, 1979,(1) the req- from Ohio (Mr. MOTTL). uisite number of signatures hav- The motion was agreed to.... The Clerk read the joint resolu- ing been obtained, the House tion.... agreed to a motion to discharge The SPEAKER. The gentleman from the Committee on the Judiciary Ohio (Mr. MOTTL) is recognized for 1 from further consideration of hour. House Joint Resolution 74, proposing an amendment to the Con- § 4.11 A joint resolution pro- stitution regarding school busing. posing an amendment to the The House having adopted that Constitution that is consid- motion, it was then in order for a ered pursuant to a successful Member who had signed the mo- motion to discharge the com- tion to discharge to move that the mittee of jurisdiction is sus- House proceed to the immediate ceptible to the motion to re- consideration of the joint resolu- commit. tion. Proceedings after the motion On Aug. 10, 1970,(1) Mrs. Mar- to discharge was agreed to were tha W. Griffiths, of Michigan, as follows: moved to discharge the Committee Mr. [Ronald M.] MOTTL [of Ohio]. on the Judiciary from the further Mr. Speaker, pursuant to the provi- consideration of House Joint Reso- sions of clause 4, rule 2,(2) and the lution 264, the requisite number of signatures having been ob- 1. 125 CONG. REC. 20358, 20362, 96th tained for such a motion to be in Cong. 1st Sess. In general, joint resolutions proposing constitutional order. After an affirmative vote on amendments are not required to be the motion to discharge, a subse- considered in the Committee of the quent affirmative vote on a mo- Whole. 8 Cannon’s Precedents tion for immediate consideration § 2395. 2. Parliamentarian’s Note: Although now Rule XV clause 2, House Rules the Congressional Record states that and Manual § 892 (2007). See Mr. Mr. Mottl’s motion referred to Mottl’s discharge motion, ‘‘clause 4, rule 2,’’ the reference 3. Thomas P. O’Neill, Jr. (MA). clearly should have been to ‘‘clause 1. 116 CONG. REC. 27999, 28000, 4, rule 27,’’ the ‘‘Discharge Rule,’’ 28004, 28036, 91st Cong. 2d Sess.

VerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:45 Jan 25, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 F:\PRECEDIT\VOL17\17COMP~1 27-2A Ch. 34 § 4 DESCHLER-BROWN-JOHNSON PRECEDENTS

of the joint resolution, and debate PARLIAMENTARY INQUIRY on the joint resolution, Mr. Wil- Mr. [Emanuel] CELLER [of New liam M. McCulloch, of Ohio, York].(4) Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary moved to recommit the joint reso- inquiry. lution to the Committee on the The SPEAKER. The gentleman will Judiciary. state his parliamentary inquiry. Mr. CELLER. Mr. Speaker, I under- The proceedings in the House stand the rule provides for 20 minutes were as follows: of debate, 10 minutes on either side. Is Mrs. GRIFFITHS. Mr. Speaker, pur- it correct that the chairman of the Ju- suant to clause 4, rule XXVII, I call up diciary Committee, being opposed to motion No. 5, to discharge the Com- the discharge petition, will be allocated mittee on the Judiciary from the fur- 10 minutes? ther consideration of House Joint Reso- The SPEAKER. The gentleman’s lution 264, proposing an amendment to statement is correct that the rule pro- the constitution of the United States vides for 20 minutes of debate, 10 min- relative to equal rights for men and utes on each side. If the gentleman women.(2) from New York (MR. CELLER) is op- The SPEAKER.(3) Did the gentle- posed to the motion, the Chair will rec- woman sign the motion? ognize him for 10 minutes. Mrs. GRIFFITHS. Yes, Mr. Speaker, Is the gentleman opposed to the mo- I signed the motion. tion? The SPEAKER. The gentlewoman Mr. CELLER. I am opposed to the qualifies. The gentlewoman from motion, Mr. Speaker. Michigan calls up a motion to dis- The SPEAKER. Under the rule, the charge the Committee on the Judiciary gentlewoman from Michigan (Mrs. from the further consideration of the GRIFFITHS) will be recognized for 10 joint resolution (House Joint Resolu- minutes, and the gentleman from New tion 264) which the Clerk will report York (MR. CELLER) will be recognized by title. for 10 minutes.... The Clerk read the title of the joint The gentlewoman from Michigan resolution. (Mrs. GRIFFITHS) is recognized for 10 minutes. 2. The motion to discharge obtained the Mrs. GRIFFITHS.... requisite 218 signatures and was en- I ask you, Mr. Speaker, to support tered on the Discharge Calendar on the discharge motion; to vote for the July 20, 1970, pursuant to Rule motion for immediate consideration; to XXVII clause 4. House Rules and support the previous question; to vote Manual § 908 (1969) [now Rule XV against any motion to recommit with clause 2, House Rules and Manual or without instructions and to vote for § 892 (2007)]. 116 CONG. REC. 24999, the amendment.... 25000, 91st Cong. 1st Sess., July 20, 1970. 4. Mr. Celler was the chairman of the 3. John W. McCormack (MA). Committee on the Judiciary.

VerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:45 Jan 25, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 F:\PRECEDIT\VOL17\17COMP~1 27-2A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS Ch. 34 § 4

The SPEAKER. The question is on ‘‘SEC. 3. This amendment shall the motion offered by the gentlewoman take effect one year after the date of from Michigan (Mrs. GRIFFITHS) to dis- ratification.’’ charge the Committee on the Judiciary The SPEAKER. The gentlewoman from further consideration of House from Michigan is recognized for 1 Joint Resolution 264.... hour.... So the motion to discharge was agreed to.... Mrs. GRIFFITHS. Mr. Speaker, I Mrs. GRIFFITHS. Mr. Speaker, pur- move the previous question on the suant to the provisions of clause 4, rule joint resolution. XXVII, I move that the House proceed The previous question was ordered. to the immediate consideration of The SPEAKER. The question is on House Joint Resolution 264. the engrossment and third reading of The SPEAKER. The question is on the joint resolution. the motion offered by the gentlewoman The joint resolution was ordered to from Michigan (Mrs. GRIFFITHS). be engrossed and read a third time and The motion was agreed to. was read a third time. The SPEAKER. The Clerk will re- The SPEAKER. The question is on port the joint resolution. the passage of the joint resolution. The Clerk read as follows: MOTION TO RECOMMIT H.J. RES. 264 Resolved by the Senate and House Mr. [William M.] MCCULLOCH [of of Representatives of the United Ohio]. Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion to States of America in Congress assem- recommit. bled (two-thirds of each House con- The SPEAKER. Is the gentleman op- curring therein), That the following article is proposed as an amendment posed to the joint resolution? to the Constitution of the United Mr. MCCULLOCH. I am in its States, which shall be valid to all in- present form, Mr. Speaker. tents and purposes as part of the The SPEAKER. The Clerk will re- Constitution when ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the port the motion to recommit. several States: The Clerk read as follows: Mr. MCCULLOCH moves that ‘‘ARTICLE — House Joint Resolution 264 be re- ‘‘SECTION 1. Equality of rights committed to the Committee on the under the law shall not be denied or Judiciary with instructions that said abridged by the United States or by committee shall promptly hold ap- any State on account of sex. Con- propriate hearings thereon.... gress and the several States shall have power, within their respective The SPEAKER. The question is on jurisdictions, to enforce this article the motion to recommit. by appropriate legislation. The question was taken; and the ‘‘SEC. 2. This article shall be inop- Speaker announced that the noes ap- erative unless it shall have been peared to have it.... ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by the legislatures of So the motion to recommit was re- three-fourths of the several States. jected.

VerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:45 Jan 25, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 F:\PRECEDIT\VOL17\17COMP~1 27-2A Ch. 34 § 4 DESCHLER-BROWN-JOHNSON PRECEDENTS

Discharge of Special Rule the undersigned Members of the House of Representatives affix their signa- § 4.12 When there has been tures, to wit: pending before the Com- 1. Louis Ludlow.... mittee on the Judiciary for 218. Dudley White. the requisite period a joint This motion was entered upon the resolution proposing an Journal, entered in the CONGRES- amendment to the Constitu- SIONAL RECORD with signatures there- tion, a special order-of-busi- to, and referred to the Calendar of Mo- tions to Discharge Committees, Decem- ness resolution providing for ber 14, 1937. consideration of that joint resolution that has been After Mr. Hamilton Fish, of pending before the Com- New York, announced to the mittee on Rules for the req- House that the petition had re- uisite time may be the object ceived the requisite 218 signa- of a discharge petition. tures, the following exchange took place:(2) On Dec. 14, 1937,(1) proceedings in the House relative to the refer- Mr. LUDLOW [of Indiana]. Mr. Speaker, I have just arrived in the ral of a discharge motion to the Chamber. I understand the gentleman Discharge Calendar were as fol- from New York has announced the lows: completion of the signing of names to the discharge petition to bring before MOTION TO DISCHARGE COMMITTEE the House the resolution (H. J. Res. APRIL 6, 1937. 199) which proposes to give the people To the Clerk of the House of Rep- of America the right to vote on partici- resentatives: pation in foreign wars.... Pursuant to clause 4 of rule XXVII, Mr. [Hatton W.] SUMNERS [of Texas]. Mr. Speaker, will the gen- I, Hon. LOUIS LUDLOW, move to discharge the Committee on Rules from tleman yield? the consideration of the resolution (H. MR. LUDLOW. I yield to the gen- Res. 165) entitled ‘‘A resolution to tleman from Texas. make House Joint Resolution 199, a Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. Can the joint resolution proposing an amend- gentleman tell me how much time is ment to the Constitution of the United allowed for discussion under the rule? States to provide for a referendum on Mr. LUDLOW. I may say to the gen- war, a special order of business,’’ which tleman the petition has been filed so was referred to said committee March long I have almost forgotten the terms 24, 1937, in support of which motion of the resolution, but I believe the rule provides for 6 hours of debate.... 1. 82 CONG. REC. 1517, 1518, 75th Cong. 2d Sess. 2. Id. at pp. 1516, 1517.

VerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:45 Jan 25, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 F:\PRECEDIT\VOL17\17COMP~1 27-2A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS Ch. 34 § 4

Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. Mr. Speak- The SPEAKER. Undoubtedly. er, a parliamentary inquiry. Mr. [Wright] PATMAN [of Texas]. The SPEAKER.(3) The gentleman Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary inquiry. will state it. The SPEAKER. The gentleman will Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. How much state it. time is allowed for debate on a motion Mr. PATMAN. It is my under- to discharge a committee from further standing this resolution may come up consideration of a measure? on the second or fourth Monday of the The SPEAKER. The Chair may month, providing 7 legislative days state, in answer to the inquiry of the have elapsed before such second or gentleman from Texas, that under the fourth Monday. This being so, the reso- discharge rule only 20 minutes are al- lution could not come up for consider- lowed on the motion to discharge the ation until the second Monday in Janu- Committee on Rules from the consider- ary, in view of the fact that the fourth ation of the resolution, one-half con- Monday in December will be the 27th. trolled by those in favor of and one- The SPEAKER. The Chair may state half those opposed to the motion to dis- to the gentleman the Chair has no cal- charge the committee. endar before him, but it is a matter of The Chair has before him the resolu- calculation. The Chair may say further tion pending before the Committee on the 7 days begin to run as of this date. Rules and observes that the resolution Mr. PATMAN. It is improbable we itself provides not to exceed 6 hours of shall be in session on the 27th. general debate in the event the matter The SPEAKER. The Chair can make should be considered. no statement as to that. Mr. [William I.] SIROVICH [of New York]. Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary Mr. [John J.] O’CONNOR of New inquiry. York. Mr. Speaker, am I correct in understanding this discharge petition is The SPEAKER. The gentleman will aimed at the Committee on Rules? state it. Mr. SIROVICH. If the Ludlow reso- The SPEAKER. The resolution lution comes before the House and a seems to be aimed in that direction. vote is finally taken, is a two-thirds Mr. O’CONNOR of New York. Mr. vote of the House required to pass the Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to resolution? proceed for 1 minute. The SPEAKER. Under the Constitu- The SPEAKER. Is there objection to tion of the United States any proposal the request of the gentleman from New to amend the Constitution requires a York? two-thirds vote of the House of Rep- There was no objection. resentatives. Mr. O’CONNOR of New York. Mr. Mr. SIROVICH. Therefore, in order Speaker, this is another example of the to pass the Ludlow resolution the anomalous situation caused by the House will have to pass it by a two- method of legislating by petition. There thirds vote? is a great deal of confusion about that in the minds of representatives of the 3. William B. Bankhead (AL). press as well as Members of the

VerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:45 Jan 25, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 F:\PRECEDIT\VOL17\17COMP~1 27-2A Ch. 34 § 4 DESCHLER-BROWN-JOHNSON PRECEDENTS

House. The Committee on Rules was Mr. LUDLOW. I may say to the gen- never intended to be included in any tleman from New York that the rules such discharge rule, because no bills of the House are elaborately set forth are ever before the Committee on in the book of rules. This is one of the Rules. It is not a legislative committee. rules of the House and we are fol- For instance, the committee has never lowing a perfectly proper parliamen- heard of this matter. The bill has not tary procedure. been reported by the Committee on the Mr. O’CONNOR of New York. Why Judiciary. How the Rules Committee did not the gentleman direct his peti- can be discharged in any reasonable or tion against the recalcitrant committee parliamentary sense I cannot imagine. which has his bill? [Laughter.] Take the case of the wage and hour Mr. SNELL. I do not understand bill. That bill was pending on the cal- how we can discharge the Rules Com- endar and would have been reached in mittee when the bill is before the Judi- the ordinary course of the business of ciary Committee and there is nothing the House. I do not know yet from pending before the Committee on what the Rules Committee was dis- Rules.(4) charged; but as to this monstrosity, the present petition, this bill is still pend- The motion to discharge was ing in the Committee on the Judiciary; not called from the calendar until it has never come before the Rules after the third session of the 75th Committee, which has never heard or Congress had convened. had any knowledge of it. How the On Jan. 10, 1938,(5) proceedings Committee on Rules can be discharged from the consideration of such a bill I relative to this matter were as fol- cannot divine. Nor can I conceive of lows: any reason for the existence of such an REFERENDUM ON WAR anomalous parliamentary procedure. Mr. SNELL and Mr. LUDLOW rose. The SPEAKER. The Chair recog- Mr. O’CONNOR of New York. I yield nizes the gentleman from Indiana [Mr. to the gentleman from New York. LUDLOW]. Mr. [Bertrand H.] SNELL [of New Mr. LUDLOW. Mr. Speaker, pursu- York]. The gentleman has stated the ant to rule XXVII, I call up the motion parliamentary inquiry I was about to submit to the Speaker with respect to 4. Parliamentarian’s Note: Although how they can discharge the Rules the joint resolution proposing a con- Committee from the consideration of stitutional amendment was not di- this bill. rectly before the Committee on Mr. O’CONNOR of New York. Well, Rules, the motion to discharge was we are living in strange days of par- directed at a simple resolution pro- liamentary procedure, I will admit. posing to provide for consideration of Mr. LUDLOW. Mr. Speaker, will the the joint resolution that had been re- gentleman yield? ferred to that committee. Mr. O’CONNOR of New York. I 5. 83 CONG. REC. 276–283, 75th Cong. yield. 3d Sess.

VerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:45 Jan 25, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 F:\PRECEDIT\VOL17\17COMP~1 27-2A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS Ch. 34 § 4

to discharge the Committee on Rules designated by the Speaker, the joint from further consideration of House resolution shall be read for amend- Resolution 165. ment under the 5-minute rule. At the conclusion of the reading of the The SPEAKER. The gentleman from joint resolution for amendment the Indiana calls up a resolution, which Committee shall rise and report the the Clerk will report by title. joint resolution to the House with The Clerk read as follows: such amendments as may have been adopted, and the previous question Resolution to make House Joint shall be considered as ordered on the Resolution 199, a joint resolution joint resolution and the amendments proposing an amendment to the Con- thereto to final passage without in- stitution of the United States to pro- tervening motion, except one motion vide for a referendum on war, a spe- to recommit. The special order shall cial order of business. be a continuing order until the joint The resolution is as follows: resolution is finally disposed of.... Resolved, That upon the day suc- The SPEAKER. The question is on ceeding the adoption of this resolu- the motion of the gentleman from Indi- tion a special order be, and is here- ana [Mr. LUDLOW] to discharge the by, created by the House of Rep- Committee on Rules from further con- resentatives for the consideration of sideration of the resolution (H. Res. House Joint Resolution 199, a public 165). resolution which has remained in the The question was taken, and the Committee on the Judiciary for 30 or Speaker announced that the noes more days without action. That such seemed to have it. special order be, and is hereby, cre- Mr. LUDLOW. Mr. Speaker, I de- ated, notwithstanding any further mand the yeas and nays. action on said joint resolution by the Committee on the Judiciary or any The yeas and nays were ordered. rule of the House. That on said day The question was taken; and there the Speaker shall recognize the Rep- were—yeas 188, nays 209, answered resentative from Indiana, LOUIS ‘‘present’’ 4, not voting, 30[.]... LUDLOW, to call up House Joint Res- So the motion was rejected. olution 199, a joint resolution proposing an amendment to the Con- § 4.13 After the requisite 218 stitution of the United States to provide for a referendum on war, as a Members have signed a peti- special order of business, and to tion to discharge the Com- move that the House resolve itself mittee on Rules from consid- into the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for eration of a special order-of- the consideration of said House Joint business resolution pro- Resolution 199. After general debate, which shall be confined to the joint viding for consideration of a resolution and shall continue not to joint resolution proposing an exceed 6 hours, to be equally divided amendment to the Constitu- and controlled by the Member of the House requesting the rule for the tion but before the call of the consideration of said House Joint Discharge Calendar, the Resolution 199 and the Member of the House who is opposed to the said House may consider the reso- House Joint Resolution 199, to be lution by unanimous consent. 31

VerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:45 Jan 25, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 F:\PRECEDIT\VOL17\17COMP~1 27-2A Ch. 34 § 4 DESCHLER-BROWN-JOHNSON PRECEDENTS

On May 20, 1992,(1) a motion to consent, dispensed with such busi- discharge the Committee on Rules ness and provided for consider- from further consideration of a ation of the resolution under resolution providing for consider- terms similar to those specified in ation of a joint resolution pro- the discharge petition.(3) posing a constitutional amend- The unanimous-consent request ment received the requisite num- for such consideration was as fol- ber of signatures. lows: The motion was as follows: Mr. [Richard] GEPHARDT [of Mis- MOTION TO DISCHARGE A COMMITTEE souri]. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the business in order pur- MAY 20, 1992 suant to clause 3 of rule XXVII on TO THE CLERK OF THE HOUSE OF Monday, June 8, 1992, be dispensed REPRESENTATIVES: with, and that it be in order on Pursuant to clause 4, rule XXVII, I, Wednesday, June 10, 1992, for Rep- CHARLES W. STENHOLM, move to dis- resentative STENHOLM or his designee, charge the Committee on Rules from to call up House Resolution 450 for the consideration of the resolution (H. consideration under the same terms as Res. 450) providing for the consider- if discharged from the Committee on ation of the joint resolution (H.J. Res. Rules pursuant to clause 3 of rule 290) proposing an amendment to the XXVII. Constitution to provide for a balanced Further, I ask unanimous consent budget for the United States Govern- that the period of general debate pro- ment and for greater accountability in vided for in House Resolution 450, if the enactment of tax legislation, which adopted, be expanded to 9 hours, to be was referred to said committee May 6, equally divided and controlled by Rep- 1992, in support of which motion the resentative BROOKS of Texas, Rep- undersigned Members of the House of resentative FISH of New York, and Representatives affix their signatures, Representative STENHOLM of Texas, or to wit: their designees. 1. Charles W. Stenholm. The SPEAKER pro tempore.(4) Is 2. Robert F. (Bob) Smith.... there objection to the request of the 217. Jim Chapman. gentleman from Missouri? 218. Timothy J. Penny. petitions that have received 218 sig- Before the motion to discharge natures and have laid over on the became eligible to be called up on calendar of motions to discharge for a day when such business was in seven legislative days may be called order,(2) the House, by unanimous up on the second or fourth Mondays of each month. House Rules and 1. 138 CONG. REC. 12222, 12223, 102d Manual § 892 (2007). Cong. 2d Sess. 3. 138 CONG. REC. 13617, 13618, 102d 2. Under former Rule XXVII clause 3 Cong. 2d Sess., June 4, 1992. (current Rule XV clause 2), discharge 4. Allen B. Swift (WA).

VerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:45 Jan 25, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 F:\PRECEDIT\VOL17\17COMP~1 27-2A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS Ch. 34 § 4

Mr. [Charles] STENHOLM [of discharge the Committee on Texas]. Mr. Speaker, reserving the Rules from further consider- right to object, it is not my intent to object. I would like to ask the majority ation of a special order-of- leader if I am correct in my under- business resolution pro- standing that this unanimous-consent viding for consideration of a agreement will allow for the consider- joint resolution proposing an ation of the leading balanced budget constitutional amendment under the amendment to the Constitu- rule, House Resolution 450, exactly as tion but before the call of the outlined in House Resolution 450, the Discharge Calendar, that rule discharged on May 20, with two exceptions: committee may report an- No. 1, the general debate will be in- other special order-of-busi- creased to 9 hours, with the division of ness resolution providing for time maintained proportionally as it is consideration of the subject in House Resolution 450; and No. 2, joint resolution and laying consideration of this matter will begin on Wednesday, June 10, rather than on the table the special the discharge day of Monday, June 8. order-of-business resolution Would the gentleman please confirm that is the object of the mo- this understanding? tion to discharge. Mr. GEPHARDT. Mr. Speaker, will ( ) the gentleman yield? On Sept. 29, 1982, 1 Discharge Mr. STENHOLM. I yield to the gen- Petition 18, petitioning for dis- tleman from Missouri. charge of the Committee on Rules Mr. GEPHARDT. Mr. Speaker, that from further consideration of is correct. Mr. STENHOLM. Mr. Speaker, I House Resolution 450, received withdraw my reservation of objection. the requisite number of signatures The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there for placement on the Discharge objection to the request of the gen- Calendar. The petition was as fol- tleman from Missouri? lows. There was no objection. On June 10, 1992, the House SEPTEMBER 29, 1982. proceeded to consider both the To the CLERK OF THE HOUSE OF REP- special order-of-business resolu- RESENTATIVES. tion and the joint resolution pro- Pursuant to clause 4 of rule XXVII, posing the constitutional amend- I, BARBER B. CONABLE, JR., [of New ( ) ment. 5 York] move to discharge the Com- mittee on Rules from the consideration § 4.14 After the requisite 218 of the resolution (H. Res. 450) entitled, Members sign a petition to 1. 128 CONG. REC. 26127, 26128, 97th 5. Proceedings carried at § 4.7, supra. Cong. 2d Sess.

VerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:45 Jan 25, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 F:\PRECEDIT\VOL17\17COMP~1 27-2A Ch. 34 § 4 DESCHLER-BROWN-JOHNSON PRECEDENTS

‘‘A resolution providing for the consid- up until after the election. Be- eration of the resolution (H.J. Res. cause the subject of the proposed 350) proposing an amendment to the constitutional amendment, the so- Constitution altering Federal budget procedures’’ which was referred to said called ‘‘Balanced Budget Amend- committee May 4, 1982, in support of ment,’’ was a matter of significant which motion the undersigned Mem- public interest and there was con- bers of the House of Representatives cern that the President might call affix their signatures, to wit: Congress back into session to 1. Barber B. Conable, Jr.... force a vote on the matter before 218. Charles Pashayan. the election, the Committee on House Resolution 450, a resolu- Rules reported a special order-of- tion providing for the consider- business resolution allowing for ation of the resolution (H.J. Res. consideration of the proposed con- 350) proposing an amendment to stitutional amendment before the planned adjournment but on the Constitution altering Federal terms different from those pro- budget processes, had been intro- vided in House Resolution 450, duced by Mr. Conable on May 4, the object of the discharge peti- 1982, and referred to the Com- tion. mittee on Rules.(2) On Oct. 1, 1982,(5) the House Having received the requisite considered House Resolution 604, number of signatures, the motion which (1) provided for consider- to discharge was placed on the ation of House Joint Resolution Discharge Calendar on Sept. 29, 350, and (2) laid on the table (3) 1982. However, under Rule House Resolution 450, the object (4) XXVII clause 4 the motion could of the discharge petition.(5) not be called up until the second or fourth Monday of the month The Amendment Process after having been on that calendar for at least seven days. Be- § 4.15 A motion to recommit a cause of a planned adjournment bill reported by one com- for the November 1982 congres- mittee with instructions to sional election, the motion would report the bill back to the not have been eligible to be called House in the form of a joint resolution proposing to 2. 128 CONG. REC. 8659, 97th Cong. 2d Sess. 5. 128 CONG. REC. 27172, 27178, 97th 3. See Id. at pp. 26127, 26128. Cong. 2d Sess. 4. Now Rule XV clause 2, House Rules 6. The text of H. Res. 604 is set forth and Manual § 892 (2007). in § 4.4, supra.

VerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:45 Jan 25, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 F:\PRECEDIT\VOL17\17COMP~1 27-2A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS Ch. 34 § 4

amend the Constitution to verted the bill into a joint resolu- accomplish the purpose of tion proposing to amend the Con- the bill was held not in order stitution. A point of order was on the ground that the in- made against the motion. The structions were not germane, Speaker, Sam Rayburn, of Texas, inasmuch as a constitutional ruled that the motion was not in amendment would lie within order as the instructions were not the jurisdiction of another germane as such instructions ad- committee. dressed matter within the juris- On July 26, 1949,(1) the House diction of the Committee on the was considering H.R. 3199, mak- Judiciary. ing unlawful the requirement for The proceedings in the House the payment of a poll tax. The bill were as follows: had been reported by the Com- Mr. [Robert] HALE [of Maine]. Mr. mittee on House Administration. Speaker, I offer a motion to recommit. A motion was offered to recommit The SPEAKER. Is the gentleman op- the bill to that committee with in- posed to the bill? structions that would have con- Mr. HALE. I am, Mr. Speaker. The SPEAKER. The Clerk will re- 1. 95 CONG. REC. 10247, 81st Cong. 1st port the motion to recommit. Sess. See also Ch. 28, § 23.8, supra. The Clerk read as follows: In addition, when a proposed constitutional amendment concerning Mr. HALE moves to recommit the one subject is under consideration, bill H.R. 3199 to the Committee on House Administration with direc- an amendment to address another tions that they report the legislation subject is not in order under House back to the House in the form of a Rule XVI clause 7 House Rules and joint resolution amending the Con- Manual § 928 (2007) (the ‘‘germane- stitution to make illegal payment of poll taxes as a qualification for vot- ness rule’’). See, e.g., 151 CONG. REC. ing. 13538–42, 109th Cong. 1st Sess., June 22, 2005 (amendments regard- Mr. [Vito] MARCANTONIO [of New ing the budget of the United States York]. Mr. Speaker, a point of order. Government and a Social Security The SPEAKER. The gentleman will trust fund offered to a proposed con- state it. stitutional amendment regarding Mr. MARCANTONIO. I make the physical desecration of the flag); 117 point of order that the language which CONG. REC. 35813, 35814, 92d Cong. is carried in the motion to recommit is 1st Sess., Oct. 12, 1971 (amendment not germane to the bill. The motion proposing to add ‘‘race, creed or calls for a constitutional amendment. color’’ to a proposed constitutional The SPEAKER. The Chair is in- amendment regarding equality of clined to agree with the gentleman for rights on account of sex). the simple reason that a constitutional

VerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:45 Jan 25, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 F:\PRECEDIT\VOL17\17COMP~1 27-2A Ch. 34 § 4 DESCHLER-BROWN-JOHNSON PRECEDENTS

amendment involving this question vious question is preferential to would lie within the jurisdiction of the the motion to amend, the Speak- Committee on the Judiciary and not er(2) first recognized Mr. Celler. within the Committee on House Ad- ministration.(2) The Chair sustains the The proceedings were as fol- point of order. lows: Mr. WYLIE. Mr. Speaker, I yield to § 4.16 Where a joint resolution the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. BU- is under consideration in the CHANAN) for the purpose of offering an House and the Member con- amendment. Mr. [John] BUCHANAN. Mr. Speak- trolling the time yields to an- er, I have an amendment at the desk. other Member for the pur- The SPEAKER. Does the gentleman pose of amendment, a third realize he will lose control of the time? Member seeking to move the Mr. WYLIE. The gentleman realizes he loses control of the time. I do yield previous question on the to the gentleman from Alabama for the joint resolution is entitled to purpose of offering an amendment. recognition for that purpose The SPEAKER. The gentleman has in preference to the Member yielded the floor.

seeking to offer the amend- MOTION OFFERED BY MR. CELLER ment. Mr. CELLER. Mr. Speaker, I move On Nov. 8, 1971,(1) the House, the previous question on House Joint pursuant to a motion to discharge, Resolution 191. was considering in the House the The SPEAKER. The motion is com- pletely and highly privileged and is in joint resolution, House Joint Reso- order. lution 191, proposing an amendment to the Constitution relative PARLIAMENTARY INQUIRY to nondenominational prayer in Mr. [Gerald R.] FORD [of Michigan]. public buildings. The manager, Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary inquiry. Chalmers P. Wylie, of Ohio, yield- The SPEAKER. The gentleman will state it. ed to another Member for the pur- Mr. Gerald R. FORD. Mr. Speaker, if pose of offering an amendment, the previous question is voted down, whereupon Mr. Emanuel Celler, of does that permit the offering of an New York, moved the previous amendment by the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. BUCHANAN)? question on the joint resolution. The SPEAKER. If it is voted down, Because the motion for the pre- any proper motion can be made. The question is on the motion offered 2. For discussion of committee jurisdic- by the gentleman from New York (Mr. tion, see § 3, supra. CELLER). 1. 117 CONG. REC. 39945, 92d Cong. 1st Sess. 2. Carl Albert (OK).

VerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:45 Jan 25, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 F:\PRECEDIT\VOL17\17COMP~1 27-2A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS Ch. 34 § 4

The motion was rejected. The proceedings were as fol-

AMENDMENT OFFERED BY MR. lows: BUCHANAN PROPOSING AN AMENDMENT TO THE Mr. BUCHANAN. Mr. Speaker, I CONSTITUTION TO PROVIDE FOR A offer an amendment. BALANCED BUDGET The Clerk read as follows: The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. ( ) Amendment offered by Mr. BU- MCNULTY). 3 Pursuant to House Reso- CHANAN: Page 2, lines 1 and 2, strike lution 450, the Chair declares the out the word ‘‘nondenominational’’ House in the Committee of the Whole and insert in lieu thereof the word House on the State of the Union for ‘‘voluntary’’; and on page 2, line 2, strike out the period and add the the further consideration of the joint words ‘‘or meditation.’’(3) resolution (H.J. Res. 290). § 4.17 When the resolving IN THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE clause of a joint resolution Accordingly, the House resolved proposing an amendment to itself into the Committee of the Whole the Constitution is not in the House on the State of the Union for the further consideration of the joint requisite form, an amend- resolution, (H.J. Res. 290) proposing an ment offered from the floor amendment to the Constitution to pro- included a correction to the vide for a balanced budget for the resolving clause. United States Government and for greater accountability in the enact- (1) On June 11, 1992, the House ment of tax legislation, with Mr. [RAY- proceeded to consider a joint reso- MOND] THORNTON [Jr., of Arkansas] in lution proposing an amendment to the chair. the Constitution relating to pro- The Clerk read the title of the bill. viding for a balanced budget. The The CHAIRMAN. When the Com- resolving clause of the resolution mittee of the Whole rose on Wednes- was not in the requisite form.(2) day, June 10, 1992, all time for general debate had expired. 3. The House adopted the amendment Without objection, the joint resolu- offered by Mr. Buchanan and then tion is considered as having been read rejected the joint resolution. 117 under the 5-minute rule. CONG. REC. 39945, 39957, 39958, There was no objection. 92d Cong. 1st Sess., Nov. 8, 1971. The text of House Joint Resolution 1. 138 CONG. REC. 14392, 14393, 102d 290 is as follows: Cong. 2d Sess. 2. The form for the resolving clause of amendment to the Constitution in- joint resolutions is set forth in sec- cludes a parenthetical statement as tion 102 of title 1, United States follows: ‘‘(two-thirds of each House Code. By usage, the resolving clause concurring therein).’’ See § 2, supra. for a joint resolution proposing an 3. Michael R. McNulty (NY).

VerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:45 Jan 25, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 F:\PRECEDIT\VOL17\17COMP~1 27-2A Ch. 34 § 4 DESCHLER-BROWN-JOHNSON PRECEDENTS

H.J. RES. 290 AMENDMENT IN THE NATURE OF A SUBSTITUTE OFFERED BY MR. STEN- Resolved [sic], HOLM ARTICLE—. Mr. STENHOLM. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment in the nature of a SECTION 1. Prior to each fiscal year, the Congress and the President substitute. shall agree on an estimate of total The Clerk read as follows: receipts for the fiscal year by enact- Amendment in the nature of a ment of a law devoted solely to that substitute offered by Mr. STENHOLM: subject. Total outlays for that year Strike all after the word ‘‘Resolved’’ shall not exceed the level of esti- and insert the following: mated receipts set forth in such law, unless three-fifths of the whole num- by the Senate and House of Rep- resentatives of the United States of ber of each House of Congress shall America in Congress assembled (two- provide, by a rollcall vote, for a spe- thirds of each House concurring cific excess of outlays over estimated therein), That the following article is receipts.... proposed as an amendment to the The CHAIRMAN. No amendments to Constitution of the United States, the joint resolution are in order except which shall be valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitu- the following amendments, which shall tion if ratified by the legislatures of be considered only in the following three-fourths of the several States order, which shall not be subject to within seven years after its submis- amendment, and which shall be debat- sion to the States for ratification: able for 60 minutes, equally divided and controlled by the proponent and ‘‘ARTICLE— an opponent of the amendment: ‘‘SECTION 1. Total outlays for any First, an amendment in the nature fiscal year shall not exceed total re- of a substitute offered by the gen- ceipts for that fiscal year, unless tleman from New York [Mr. FISH] or three-fifths of the whole number of his designee; . . . each House of Congress shall provide Fifth, an amendment in the nature by law for a specific excess of outlays over receipts by a rollcall vote.... of a substitute offered by the gentleman from Texas [Mr. STENHOLM] or The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the his designee[.] rule, the gentleman from Texas [Mr. The amendment in the nature Stenholm differed from that typically of a substitute offered by Mr. used in the case of an amendment in Charles W. Stenholm, of Texas, the nature of a substitute in that it included a correction to the form did not propose to ‘‘strike all after of the resolving clause and added, the resolving clause’’ and insert new before the text of the proposed text. Rather, in this case, the amendment proposed to ‘‘strike all after the amendment itself, the customary word ‘Resolved’ ’’ and insert new text. text proposing the matter to the That formulation allowed for the ad- States.(4) dition of new text as part of (and at the end of) the resolving clause. 138 4. The form of the amendment in the CONG. REC. 14435, 102d Cong. 2d nature of a substitute offered by Mr. Sess., June 11, 1992.

VerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:45 Jan 25, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 F:\PRECEDIT\VOL17\17COMP~1 27-2A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS Ch. 34 § 5

STENHOLM] will be recognized for 30 Vote Required on Final Pas- minutes, and a Member opposed, the sage gentleman from California [Mr. PA- NETTA], the chairman of the Committee § 5.1 The vote required in the on the Budget, will be recognized for House for adoption of a joint 30 minutes. resolution proposing an The Chair recognizes the gentleman amendment to the Constitu- from Texas [Mr. STENHOLM]. tion is two-thirds of those Members present and voting, a quorum being present, and § 5. Voting not two-thirds of the total membership. Under Article V of the Constitu- ( ) tion, passage of a joint resolution On Sept. 18, 1969, 1 the House proposing an amendment to the was considering House Joint Reso- lution 681, proposing an amend- Constitution requires a two-thirds ment to the Constitution relating (1) majority of each House. Such a to the election of the President joint resolution may be passed by and Vice President. After consid- each House only with a quorum eration was completed, the Speak- present. During consideration of er(2) put the question on passage. such a joint resolution by either The Speaker then responded to House, only a simple majority (not parliamentary inquiries as fol- a two-thirds majority) is required lows: for adoption of an amendment to The SPEAKER. The question is on the joint resolution, including an the passage of the joint resolution.

amendment to the text of the pro- PARLIAMENTARY INQUIRIES posed amendment to the Constitu- Mr. [Durward] Hall [of Missouri]. tion itself. The Chair puts the Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary inquiry. question on final passage of such The SPEAKER. The gentleman will a joint resolution first to a voice state the parliamentary inquiry. vote, as the yeas and nays are not Mr. HALL. Mr. Speaker, in view of article V of the Constitution, am I cor- required. rect in my calculation that it requires 289 Members voting for passage? 1. The relevant portion of Article V The SPEAKER. The answer to the reads as follows: ‘‘The Congress, gentleman’s parliamentary inquiry is whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall pro- 1. 115 CONG. REC. 26007, 91st Cong. pose Amendments to this Constitu- 1st Sess. tion....’’ 2. John W. McCormack (MA).

VerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:45 Jan 25, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 F:\PRECEDIT\VOL17\17COMP~1 27-2A Ch. 34 § 5 DESCHLER-BROWN-JOHNSON PRECEDENTS

that it requires two-thirds of the Mem- On Dec. 14, 1937,(1) Speaker bers present and voting thereon, a William B. Bankhead, of Ala- quorum being present. bama, in response to a parliamen- Mr. HALL. Mr. Speaker, a further tary inquiry, stated that the re- parliamentary inquiry. quirement for a two-thirds vote to The SPEAKER. The gentleman will pass a joint resolution proposing a state it. constitutional amendment applied Mr. HALL. Mr. Speaker, is this con- even when the joint resolution sistent with article V which says: was the object of a successful dis- The Congress, whenever two charge petition. The proceedings thirds of both Houses shall deem it are discussed in § 4.12, supra. necessary, shall propose Amend- ments to this Constitution. Vote Required to Amend Joint Would that be two-thirds of the total Resolution membership or two-thirds of those present and voting? § 5.3 An amendment to a joint The SPEAKER. In accordance with resolution proposing an (2) the precedents of the House and de- amendment to the Constitu- cisions of the Supreme Court,(3) it requires two-thirds of those present and tion is adopted by a majority voting thereon, a quorum being vote. present. On Feb. 24, 1931,(1) the House The Chair’s response to the gentle- was considering House Joint Reso- man’s parliamentary inquiry is that it lution 292, a joint resolution pro- requires two thirds of those present posing an amendment to the Con- and voting thereon, a quorum being stitution addressing the assembly present. of Congress. The Speaker,(2) in re- The question is on the passage of the sponse to a parliamentary inquiry, joint resolution. stated that only a majority of the § 5.2 A two-thirds vote is re- House (and not two-thirds) was required to adopt an amendment quired to pass a joint resolu- to the joint resolution. tion proposing an amend- The SPEAKER. The previous ques- ment to the Constitution tion is ordered under the rule. when the joint resolution is considered under the dis- 1. 82 CONG. REC. 1517, 75th Cong. 2d charge process. Sess. 1. 74 CONG. REC. 5906, 71st Cong. 3d 2. See, e.g., 5 Hinds’ Precedents Sess. See also 5 Hinds’ Precedents §§ 7027, 7029, 7030 and 8 Cannon’s § 7031 (point of order) and 8 Can- Precedents § 3503. non’s Precedents § 3504 (parliamen- 3. See, e.g., National Prohibition Cases, tary inquiry). 253 U.S. 350 (1920). 2. Nicholas Longworth (OH).

VerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:45 Jan 25, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 F:\PRECEDIT\VOL17\17COMP~1 27-2A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS Ch. 34 § 5

The question is on the amendment. On Mar. 9, 1928,(1) the Speaker, Mr. [Lamar] JEFFERS [of Alabama] Nicholas Longworth, of Ohio, re- and Mr. [Charles] CRISP [of Georgia] sponded to an inquiry by Mr. demanded the yeas and nays. John Q. Tilson, of Connecticut, as The yeas and nays were ordered. to whether the yeas and nays Mr. [John] KETCHAM [of Michigan]. were required on joint resolutions Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary inquiry. proposing amendments to the The SPEAKER. The gentleman will Constitution, as follows: state it. The SPEAKER. There is no rule Mr. KETCHAM. Will the Chair which provides for a yea-and-nay vote, please advise the Members by what and the Chair will quote from the ( ) majority the amendment would have to Manual, section 224: 2 carry? Is a two-thirds majority nec- Ayes and nays not required to pass essary? a resolution amending the Constitu- tion The SPEAKER. No; a majority is The question is on the passage of the only necessary on an amendment. resolution.

Yeas and Nays Not Required 1. 70 CONG. REC. 4430, 70th Cong. 1st Sess. See also 5 Hinds’ Precedents § 5.4 The yeas and nays are not required on the question of §§ 7038, 7039. passing a joint resolution 2. Now House Rules and Manual § 192 proposing an amendment to the Constitution. (2007) (‘‘The yeas and nays are not required to pass a joint resolution proposing to amend the Constitu- tion. . . .’’).

VerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:45 Jan 25, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 F:\PRECEDIT\VOL17\17COMP~1 27-2A Ch. 34 § 6 DESCHLER-BROWN-JOHNSON PRECEDENTS

C. Senate Consideration; House-Senate Relations § 6. Senate Consideration Feb. 26, 1869,(2) illustrate. On that day, the Senate concluded In the Senate, as in the House, consideration of a conference re- although only a simple majority port on a joint resolution pro- vote is required to amend a joint posing a constitutional amend- resolution proposing a constitu- ment regarding suffrage. The pro- tional amendment, a two-thirds ceedings relating to the announce- majority vote is required for pas- ment of the outcome of the vote sage. The Senate has converted, were as follows: by amendment, a legislative joint The PRESIDENT pro tempore.(3) The resolution into a proposed con- question is on concurring in the report stitutional amendment (such a re- of the committee; and on this question sulting joint resolution requiring a the yeas and nays must be called. two-thirds vote for passage). In The question being taken by yeas and nays resulted—yeas 39, nays 13; addition, the Senate has enter- as follows: . . . tained, to a joint resolution pro- The PRESIDENT pro tempore. On posing a constitutional amend- this question the yeas are 39, and the ment, amendments to achieve a nays are 13. Two thirds of the Sen- legislative purpose instead. ators present having voted in the affirmative, the report is agreed to. f Mr. [George H.] WILLIAMS [of Or- egon] obtained the floor. Vote Required for Passage Mr. [Garrett] DAVIS [of Kentucky]. I rise to a question of order. I ask the § 6.1 The vote required in the Chair what the number of votes was Senate for passage of a joint announced to be. resolution proposing an The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The amendment to the Constitu- yeas were 39, and the nays were 13; being two thirds. tion is two-thirds of those Mr. DAVIS. The question of order present and voting, a that I make is that the decision of this quorum being present, and question has not been announced by not two-thirds of the total the Chair according to the Constitu- membership. tion. The Chair has announced that

The vote required in the Senate 2. 41 CONG. GLOBE 1641, 1642, 40th is the same as that required in Cong. 3d Sess. This precedent is also the House,(1) as the proceedings of carried at 5 Hinds’ Precedents § 7028. 1. See § 5.1, supra. 3. Benjamin F. Wade (OH).

VerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:45 Jan 25, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00054 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 F:\PRECEDIT\VOL17\17COMP~1 27-2A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS Ch. 34 § 6

the proposition has received the vote of Mr. [Lyman] TRUMBULL [of Illi- two thirds of the Senate, and therefore nois]. If the Chair will indulge me a that it has passed. I controvert that moment, this very point was raised in fact. There are now thirty-seven States regard to a constitutional amendment in the Union. They are entitled to sev- some years ago, and the Senate de- enty-four members of the Senate. cided by a vote, almost unanimously, that two thirds of the Senators present Mr. [James W.] NYE [of Nevada]. were sufficient to carry a constitutional The honorable Senator will allow me to amendment. I think that the Presiding correct him. The Chair did not make Officer upon reflection will recollect it. the announcement that the honorable It was the constitutional amendment Senator says he did. He said it re- that was proposed before the war. I ceived two thirds of the votes of all the myself made the point for the purpose members present. That was the an- of having it decided, and it was de- nouncement by the Chair.... cided, I think by a nearly unanimous The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The vote, that two thirds of the Senators Chair desires the Senator to under- present, a quorum being present, was stand what the Chair said in the an- sufficient to carry a constitutional nouncement of the vote. It was that amendment.... two thirds of the Senators present had Mr. WILLIAMS. I ask for a decision voted in the affirmative. That is the on the question of order. way in which it was announced by the The PRESIDENT pro tempore. I be- Chair. lieve it has been decided according to Mr. DAVIS. But then the conclusion all the precedents.... was— The PRESIDENT pro tempore. That Vote Required to Amend Joint the report was concurred in. Resolution Mr. DAVIS. That is just as I understood it. Now, the conclusion does not § 6.2 In the Senate, when a follow the vote which the Chair an- joint resolution proposing an nounced, because the Senate consists amendment to the Constitu- of seventy-four members, and to con- tion is under consideration, stitute two thirds of the Senate a vote of fifty is necessary. My point of order an amendment to the joint is, that when a less number than two resolution is adopted by a thirds of the Senate is required by the majority vote. Constitution for any purpose, for in- On Oct. 2, 1970,(1) the Presiding stance to ratify a treaty or to confirm (2) a nomination, the Constitution ex- Officer of the Senate, in re- pressly says that it shall be two thirds sponse to parliamentary inquiries, of the members present. In voting advised the Senate of the vote re- upon a proposition to amend the Con- quired to adopt amendments, or stitution, the Constitution does not limit the number of two thirds by recit- 1. 118 CONG. REC. 34755, 91st Cong. 2d ing that it is two thirds of the mem- Sess. bers present.... 2. Clifford P. Hansen (WY).

VerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:45 Jan 25, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00055 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 F:\PRECEDIT\VOL17\17COMP~1 27-2A Ch. 34 § 6 DESCHLER-BROWN-JOHNSON PRECEDENTS

amendments thereto, to joint reso- for passage of the joint resolutions proposing constitutional lution. amendments. Proceedings were as On Mar. 27, 1962,(1) when the follows: Senate was considering Senate Mr. [Howard H.] BAKER [Jr., of Joint Resolution 29, proposing a Tennessee]. A further parliamentary national monument, Mr. Spessard inquiry. L. Holland, of Florida, offered an The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment that would propose a Senator will state it. constitutional amendment in- Mr. BAKER. Do I correctly understand that the amendment in the na- stead. ture of a substitute now proposed by THE ALEXANDER HAMILTON NATIONAL the distinguished Senator from North MONUMENT — AMENDMENT TO THE Carolina could be adopted as a sub- CONSTITUTION DEALING WITH POLL stitute by a simple majority vote, and TAXES not require a two-thirds vote? The Senate resumed consideration of The PRESIDING OFFICER. That is the joint resolution (S.J. Res. 29) pro- right. viding for the establishing of the Mr. BAKER. And by that same former dwelling house of Alexander token, a new substitute to the resolu- Hamilton as a national monument. tion itself, striking the amendment in Mr. [Mike] MANSFIELD [of Mon- the nature of a substitute, could also tana]. Mr. President, what is the pend- be adopted by a majority vote? ing question? The PRESIDING OFFICER. Any The VICE PRESIDENT.(2) The ques- amendment to the substitute of the tion is on agreeing to the amendment pending resolution could be adopted by of the Senator from Florida [Mr. HOL- a simple majority vote. LAND], striking out all after the resolving clause, as amended, of Senate Joint Vote Required When Joint Res- Resolution 29, and inserting in lieu olution Proposing Legislation thereof certain other words. Mr. MANSFIELD. This is a proposed is Pending constitutional amendment seeking to abolish the poll tax in the several § 6.3 In the Senate, a joint res- States, is it? olution that is legislative in nature may be amended by Before putting the question to majority vote to convert the the Senate on a point of order joint resolution into one pro- against the Holland amendment based on constitutional grounds, posing an amendment to the

Constitution. Upon adoption 1. 110 CONG. REC. 5072–106, 87th of such an amendment, a Cong. 2d Sess. two-thirds vote is required 2. Lyndon B. Johnson (TX). 44

VerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:45 Jan 25, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00056 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 F:\PRECEDIT\VOL17\17COMP~1 27-2A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS Ch. 34 § 7

the Chair responded to a par- On June 27, 2006,(1) the Senate liamentary inquiry concerning the ordered the yeas and nays on Sen- vote required to adopt the Holland ate Joint Resolution 12, proposing amendment. an amendment to the Constitution regarding physical desecration of Mr. [Carl T.] CURTIS [of Nebraska]. If the resolution were to be amended the flag, as follows. by the Holland amendment, it has The PRESIDING OFFICER.(2) The been stated it would require a two- question is on the engrossment and thirds vote for passage. My question is, third reading of the joint resolution. Will it require a two-thirds vote to The joint resolution was ordered to adopt the Holland amendment to Sen- be engrossed for a third reading and ate Joint Resolution 29? was read the third time. The VICE PRESIDENT. Only a ma- The PRESIDING OFFICER. The jority vote is required in acting upon joint resolution having been read the an amendment. third time, the question is, Shall the joint resolution, as amended, pass? After the Senate tabled the Mr. [Orrin G.] HATCH [of Utah]. I point of order and the Holland ask for the yeas and nays. amendment was adopted, the Sen- The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there ate voted on passage of the a sufficient second? amended joint resolution. There is a sufficient second. The clerk will call the roll. The PRESIDING OFFICER.(3) The The yeas and nays were ordered. joint resolution having been read the third time, the question is, Shall it pass? On this question the yeas and nays have been ordered, and the clerk § 7. Conference Reports will call the roll. The Chief Clerk called the roll.... Differences between the two The PRESIDING OFFICER. Two- Houses on a joint resolution pro- thirds of the Senators present and vot- posing a constitutional amending having voted in the affirmative, the ment may be committed to a com- joint resolution is passed. mittee of conference,(1) the report thereof requiring a two-thirds vote Yeas and Nays Not Required for adoption.(2) As with the vote on initial passage of the joint reso- § 6.4 The yeas and nays are not lution,(3) the yeas and nays are required in the Senate on the question of passing a joint 1. 152 CONG. REC. 12654, 109th Cong. resolution proposing an 2d Sess. amendment to the Constitu- 2. Lamar Alexander (TN). tion. 1. See 5 Hinds’ Precedents § 7037. 2. Id. at § 7036. 3. Lee Metcalf (MT). 3. See § 5.4, supra.

VerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:45 Jan 25, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 F:\PRECEDIT\VOL17\17COMP~1 27-2A Ch. 34 § 7 DESCHLER-BROWN-JOHNSON PRECEDENTS

not required on the vote on adopt- the other House by a two-thirds ing the conference report in the vote and then recedes from that House.(4) amendment by a simple majority vote, the joint resolution is not considered as having been § 8. Amendments Between passed.(3)

the Houses f

When one House has passed a § 8.1 Vote required to adopt an joint resolution proposing a con- amendment before passage stitutional amendment and has of other House’s joint resolu- transmitted it to the other House, tion. the House receiving the joint reso- On Apr. 13, 1965,(1) the House lution may adopt amendments by agreed to an amendment to a joint a simple majority vote, but a two- resolution proposing a constitu- thirds vote is required for pas- tional amendment that had origi- sage.(1) If one House passes with nated in the Senate. The amend- amendments such a joint resolu- ment was adopted by a simple tion that originated in the other majority vote and the Senate joint House, a two-thirds vote is re- resolution, as amended, was then quired in the House in which the passed by the requisite two-thirds joint resolution originated in order vote. Proceedings were as follows: to concur in the amendments of the other House.(2) In the rare The Clerk read the title of the Sen- case where one House amends ate joint resolution, as follows: and passes a joint resolution of S.J. RES. 1

4. See, e.g., 111 CONG. REC. 15212–16, Joint resolution proposing an amend- 89th Cong. 1st Sess., June 30, 1965. ment to the Constitution of the United States relating to succes- The same is true in the Senate, al- sion to the Presidency and Vice- though on one occasion, upon putting Presidency and to cases where the the question on agreeing to a con- President is unable to discharge ference report proposing an amend- the powers and duties of his ment to the Constitution, the Pre- office[.]... siding Officer announced that the The SPEAKER.(2) The Clerk will re- ‘‘yeas and nays must be called.’’ 41 port the amendment. Cong. Globe 1638, 1641, 40th Cong. 3d Sess., Feb. 26, 1869 (proceedings 3. See 5 Hinds’ Precedents § 7035. carried in § 6.1, supra). 1. 111 CONG. REC. 7969, 89th Cong. 1st 1. See § 8.1, infra. Sess. 2. See §§ 8.2, 8.3, infra. 2. John W. McCormack (MA).

VerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:45 Jan 25, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00058 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 F:\PRECEDIT\VOL17\17COMP~1 27-2A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS Ch. 34 § 8

The Clerk read as follows: of the President of the United Amendment offered by Mr. [Eman- States, by a two-thirds vote. Pro- uel] CELLER [of New York]: ‘‘Strike ceedings were as follows: out all after the resolving clause of Senate Joint Resolution 1 and insert Mr. [Earl] MICHENER [of Michi- the provisions of House Joint Resolu- gan]. Mr. Speaker, I ask the Speaker tion 1, as passed by the House.’’ to lay before the House for immediate The SPEAKER. The question is on consideration House Joint Resolution the amendment. 27, a joint resolution proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the The amendment was agreed to. United States relating to the terms of The SPEAKER. The question is on office of the President, with Senate the third reading of the Senate joint amendments. resolution. The SPEAKER.(2) The Clerk will re- The Senate joint resolution was or- port the title of the joint resolution and dered to be read a third time, and was the Senate amendments. read the third time. The Clerk read the title of the joint The SPEAKER. The question is on resolution. the passage of the Senate joint resolu- The Clerk read the Senate tion. amendments[.]... The question was taken; and (two- Mr. MICHENER. Mr. Speaker, this thirds having voted in favor thereof) bill with the Senate amendment was the Senate joint resolution was passed. returned to the House on March 13. It A motion to reconsider was laid on was taken informally before the full the table. Committee on the Judiciary, and I am A similar joint resolution (H.J. Res. instructed by that committee to call 1) was laid on the table. the resolution up at this time for the purpose of agreeing to the Senate § 8.2 A two-thirds vote is re- amendment. I have followed precedent quired in the House to adopt and cleared through the majority leader and the minority leader. a motion that the House con- I therefore move that the House concur in Senate amendments to cur in the Senate amendment. a House joint resolution pro- The SPEAKER. The Clerk will re- posing an amendment to the port the motion. Constitution. The Clerk read as follows: (1) Mr. MICHENER moves that the On Mar. 21, 1947, the House House concur in the Senate amend- concurred in Senate amendments ment. to House Joint Resolution 27, pro- The SPEAKER. The gentleman from posing a constitutional amend- Michigan is recognized for 1 hour.... ment regarding the term of office Mr. MICHENER. Mr. Speaker, I move the previous question. 1. 93 CONG. REC. 2389, 2392, 80th Cong. 1st Sess. 2. Joseph W. Martin, Jr. (MA).

VerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:45 Jan 25, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00059 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 F:\PRECEDIT\VOL17\17COMP~1 27-2A Ch. 34 § 8 DESCHLER-BROWN-JOHNSON PRECEDENTS

The previous question was ordered. Joint Resolution 17, proposing a The question was taken; and on a di- constitutional amendment prohib- vision (demanded by Mr. [Robert] iting the manufacture, sale, or THOMASON [of Texas]) there were— ayes 81, noes 29. transportation of intoxicating liq- Mr. [Aime J.] FORAND [of Rhode Is- uors, with House amendments land]. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote thereto. After a motion was made on the ground a quorum is not present that the Senate concur in the and make the point of order that a quorum is not present. House amendments, Mr. William The SPEAKER. The Chair will E. Borah, of Idaho, asked as a count. parliamentary inquiry whether a Mr. FORAND. Mr. Speaker, I with- two-thirds vote was required to draw the point of order. agree to the motion. So (two-thirds having voted in favor thereof) the Senate amendments were The VICE PRESIDENT.(2) That is concurred in. the opinion of the Chair. It is the view A motion to reconsider was laid on of the Chair that an amendment to a the table. resolution proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States § 8.3 A two-thirds vote is re- needs only a majority in order to be quired in the Senate to adopt adopted; but the resolution having a motion that the Senate con- once been adopted by the Senate and cur in House amendments to gone to the House and returned here a Senate joint resolution pro- for the final action of the Senate, it is posing an amendment to the necessary to have a two-thirds vote on Constitution. the amendments of the House, for this constitutes the final passage of the res- On Dec. 18, 1917,(1) the Senate olution. had under consideration Senate 12850–58, 86th Cong. 2d Sess., June 1. 56 CONG. REC. 477, 65th Cong. 2d 16, 1960. Sess. See also 106 CONG. REC. 2. Thomas R. Marshall (IN).

VerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:45 Jan 25, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00060 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 F:\PRECEDIT\VOL17\17COMP~1 27-2A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS Ch. 34 § 9

D. Ratification § 9. Generally; Certifi- tinctly in 1803 in the Senate of the United States, on a motion that the cation and Publication then proposed amendment to the Con- stitution should be submitted to the Unlike a joint resolution of a President[.]... legislative nature, a joint resolu- On a distinct vote of 23 to 7 the Sen- tion proposing a constitutional ate voted that the Committee on En- amendment is not presented to rolled Bills should not present the pro- the President under Article I, § 7, posed amendment. This is a decision clause 2 of the Constitution. Rath- made by one of the early Congresses. er, such a joint resolution is sub- But the Chair is not satisfied with having it rest on that; he is disposed to mitted to the States for ratifica- present higher authority in overruling tion. the point of order. (2) f In 1798, a case arose in the Su- preme Court of the United States de- § 9.1 Constitutional amend- pending upon the amendment to the ments that have passed both Constitution proposed in 1794, and the Houses are not presented to counsel, in argument before the court, insisted that the amendment was not the President. valid, not having been approved by the On Feb. 25, 1869,(1) Speaker President of the United States.... Schuyler Colfax, of Indiana, over- The Court, speaking through [Jus- ruled a point of order that a pro- tice Chase] . . . observed: posed constitutional amendment ‘‘The negative of the President ap- plies only to the ordinary cases of would have to be presented to the legislation. He has nothing to do President for approval. The ruling with the proposition or adoption of of the Chair was as follows: amendments to the Constitution.’’ The SPEAKER. The gentleman hav- As the Supreme Court of the United ing stated the point of order the Chair States has settled this question by a will decide it. It has been raised once decision, the Chair does not need to before and decided by the Chair. He read further authorities.... will repeat the substantial points of The Chair, therefore, thinks that the that decision, which he thinks will sat- question is settled, not only by the isfy the gentleman that his point is not practice of Congress but by a decision well taken, although based by him of the Supreme Court of the United upon the Constitution of the United States, and therefore overrules the States. The question was raised dis- point of order.

1. 41 Cong. Globe 1563, 40th Cong. 3d 2. Hollingsworth v. Virginia, 3 U.S. (3 Sess. Dall.) 378 (1798).

VerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:45 Jan 25, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00061 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 F:\PRECEDIT\VOL17\17COMP~1 27-2A Ch. 34 § 9 DESCHLER-BROWN-JOHNSON PRECEDENTS

§ 9.2 Enrolled joint resolutions JOINT RESOLUTION FILED WITH THE proposing constitutional SECRETARY OF STATE amendments are submitted Mr. LECOMPTE, from the Committee to the appropriate Federal on House Administration, reported that that committee did on this day official, designated by law, present to and file with the Secretary for submission to the States. of State of the United States a joint Responsibility for receiving from resolution of the following title: Congress enrolled joint resolutions H.J. RES. 27. Joint resolution pro- by which Congress proposes to the posing an amendment to the Con- States amendments to the Con- stitution of the United States relating to the terms of office of the stitution and for transmitting the President. same to the States has been vested in different officials of the exec- Another instance occurred on (3) utive branch over time. Currently, June 17, 1960: that responsibility is vested in the ENROLLED JOINT RESOLUTION Archivist of the United States.(1) PRESENTED The delivery of such measures to The Secretary of the Senate reported the appropriate official is reported that on today, June 17, 1960, he pre- to the House originating the sented to the Administrator, General amendment. Services Administration, the enrolled An example from 1947 is as fol- joint resolution (S.J. Res. 39) proposing (2) an amendment to the Constitution of lows: the United States granting representa- ENROLLED JOINT RESOLUTION SIGNED tion in the electoral college to the Dis- trict of Columbia. Mr. [Joseph] LeCOMPTE [of Ken- tucky], from the Committee on House Administration, reported that that committee had examined and found § 10. Submission to the truly enrolled a joint resolution of the States; Records of Ratifi- House of the following title, which was thereupon signed by the Speaker: cation H.J. Res. 27. Joint resolution proposing an amendment to the Con- The process by which a pro- stitution of the United States relat- posed amendment to the Constitu- ing to the terms of office of the Presi- dent. tion leaves Congress as officially proposed and eventually becomes 1. See § 10, infra, and 1 USC § 106b effective as part of the Constitu- (relating to amendments to the Con- tion has changed over the years stitution), and related annotations. 2. See 93 CONG. REC. 2482, 80th Cong. 3. 106 CONG. REC. 13101, 86th Cong. 1st Sess., Mar. 24, 1947. 2d Sess.

VerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:45 Jan 25, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00062 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 F:\PRECEDIT\VOL17\17COMP~1 27-2A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS Ch. 34 § 10

and occasionally has included ac- The President notified the Con- tions by the President not nec- gress of the ratification of the first essary to the effectiveness of the 10 amendments (the Bill of amendment. For example, the two Rights) by message as follows:(1) Houses by concurrent resolution The following Message from the asked the President to transmit President of the United States was re- copies of the proposed 15th ceived: Amendment to the executives of ( ) Gentlemen of the Senate, and the States, 1 and the President in- of the House of Representatives: formed Congress of the promulga- tion of the ratification of the 15th I lay before you a copy of the ratifi- Amendment.(2) The President was cation, by the Commonwealth of Vir- ginia, of the articles of amendment officially involved only in the first ( ) ( ) proposed by Congress to the Constitu- 11 amendments 3 and the 15th. 4 tion of the United States; and a copy of The ministerial functions of a letter which accompanied said ratifi- transmitting proposed amend- cation, from the Governor of Virginia. ments to the States, receiving the G. WASHINGTON notices of ratification by States, UNITED STATES, December 30, 1791. and, in some instances, declaring The papers referred to in the Mes- an amendment effective have been sage are as follows: carried out successively by the Secretary of State,(5) the Adminis- COUNCIL CHAMBER, trator of General Services,(6) and Richmond, Dec. 22, 1791. the Archivist of the United Sir: The General Assembly, during (7) States. their late session, have adopted, on the part of this Commonwealth, all the f amendments proposed by Congress to the Constitution of the United States; Early Practice their ratification whereof I do myself the honor herewith to transmit. § 10.1 President communicated I have the honor to be, &c. ratification of Bill of Rights to Congress. HENRY LEE. The PRESIDENT of the United States. 1. 5 Hinds’ Precedents § 7043. Such a concurrent resolution is not privi- VIRGINIA: leged in the House. 8 Cannon’s General Assembly, begun and held at Precedents § 3508. the Capitol, in the city of Richmond, on 2. 5 Hinds’ Precedents § 7044. Monday, the 17th day of October, in 3. See §§ 10.1, 10.2, infra. the year of our Lord 1791. 4. 5 Hinds’ Precedents § 7044. MONDAY, December 5, 1791. 5. See § 10.2, infra. 6. See § 10.3, infra. 1. 1 Annals of Cong. 54, 2d Cong. 1st 7. See § 10.4, infra. Sess., Dec. 30, 1791.

VerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:45 Jan 25, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00063 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 F:\PRECEDIT\VOL17\17COMP~1 27-2A Ch. 34 § 10 DESCHLER-BROWN-JOHNSON PRECEDENTS

Resolved, That the second, third, § 10.2 President declares 11th fourth, fifth, sixth, seventh, eighth, Amendment; Secretary of ninth, tenth, eleventh, and twelfth articles of the amendments proposed by State assumes record-keep- Congress to the Constitution of the ing responsibility. United States, be ratified by this Com- The Senate adopted a resolution monwealth. setting out the history of ratifica- December 15th, 1791: Agreed to by the tion of the first 13 proposed Senate. amendments and requesting the JOHN PRIDE, President to ascertain whether S[ecretary]. [of the] S[enate]. any States other than those re- THOS. MATTHEWS, corded had ratified the 11th (1) S[ecretary]. [of the] H[ouse of] Amendment: D[elegates]. Mr. [Henry] Tazewell [of Virginia] Examined. reported, from the committee on the subject of amendments to the constitu- The House received the same tion of the United States, which was message:(2) read, as follows: ‘‘That, of the twelve amendments A message, in writing, was received from the President of the proposed by Congress, at their session United States, by Mr. Lear, his Sec- begun and held in New York on the retary, as followeth: 4th of March, 1789, the following States ratified the 3d, 4th, 5th, 6th, UNITED STATES, 7th, 8th, 9th, 10th, 11th, 12th, prior to December 30th 1791. the first day of March, 1791, viz. New Gentleman of the Senate and the Jersey, Maryland, North Carolina, House of Representatives: South Carolina, New Hampshire, Dela- ware, New York, Pennsylvania, and I lay before you a copy of the ratifi- Rhode Island; which States making cation, by the Commonwealth of Vir- three-fourths of the then thirteen ginia, of the articles of amendment United States, the said amendments proposed by Congress to the Constitu- have become a part of the constitution. tion of the United States, and a copy of ‘‘That the first amendment was rati- a letter which accompanied said ratifi- fied prior to the first day of March, cation from the Governor of Virginia. 1791, by the following States, viz. New G. WASHINGTON. Jersey, Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina, New Hampshire, New The papers referred to in the York, and Rhode Island, and, subse- said message were read, and or- quent to that period, by Pennsylvania, dered to lie on the table. Virginia, and Vermont; which number

2. H. Jour., Vol. 1, p. 483, 2d Cong. 1st 1. S. Jour. Vol. 2, pp. 315, 316, 4th Sess, Dec. 30, 1791. Cong. 2d Sess., Jan. 31, 1797.

VerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:45 Jan 25, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00064 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 F:\PRECEDIT\VOL17\17COMP~1 27-2A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS Ch. 34 § 10

not making three-fourths of the States to the constitution concerning the su- at the period of ratification, the said ability of States; if they have, to obtain amendment has not as yet become a the proper evidences thereof. part of the constitution. Ordered, That the Secretary desire the concurrence of the House of Rep- ‘‘That the second amendment was resentatives in this resolution. ratified prior to the 1st day of March, 1791, by the following States: Mary- The House agreed to the resolu- ( ) land, North Carolina, South Carolina, tion on Feb. 24, 1797. 2 Delaware, and, subsequent to that pe- The President transmitted to riod, by Virginia and Vermont; which the Congress a message not only number not making three-fourths of indicating that a particular State the States, the said amendment has had ratified an amendment, but not become a part of the constitution.’’ also declaring that the amend- ‘‘That the amendment respecting the ment had become part of the Con- suability of States, which has been pro- stitution. The Journal recorded re- posed by Congress since March, 1791, ceipt of the message as follows:(3) has been ratified by the following States: New York, Massachusetts, A message, in writing, was received Vermont, New Hampshire, Georgia, from the President of the United States, by Mr. Taylor, Chief Clerk in Delaware, Rhode Island, and North the Department of State, as followeth: Carolina, as appears by authentic doc- uments returned to Congress. The Gentleman of the Senate and Gen- committee have strong reasons to be- tleman of the House of Representatives: lieve that other States have ratified I have now an opportunity to trans- this latter amendment, and that the mit to Congress a report of the Sec- evidences of the fact have not been as retary of State, with a copy of an act of yet returned to the proper departments the Legislature of the State of Ken- of the government; wherefore, as the tucky, consenting to the ratification of number returned do not amount to the amendment of the Constitution of three-fourths of the States, the said the United States, proposed by Con- gress in their resolution of the second amendment cannot, under present cir- day of December, one thousand seven cumstances, be reported as forming a hundred and ninety-three, relative to part of the constitution. the suability of States. This amend- Whereupon, ment having been adopted by three- Resolved, by the Senate and House fourths of the several States, may now of Representatives of the United be declared to be a part of the Con- stitution of the United States. States, That the President be requested to adopt some speedy and ef- JOHN ADAMS. fectual means of obtaining information UNITED STATES, January 8th, 1798. from the States of Connecticut, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Vir- 2. H. Jour. Vol. 2, p. 718, 4th Cong. 2d ginia, Kentucky, Tennessee, and South Sess. Carolina, whether they have ratified 3. H. Jour. Vol. 3, p. 126, 5th Cong. 2d the amendment proposed by Congress Sess., Jan. 8, 1798.

VerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:45 Jan 25, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00065 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 F:\PRECEDIT\VOL17\17COMP~1 27-2A Ch. 34 § 10 DESCHLER-BROWN-JOHNSON PRECEDENTS

The said message, and papers re- The plan, in pertinent part, ferred to therein, were read, and or- read as follows: dered to lie on the table. The message also indicates that STATUTES AT LARGE AND the President directed the Sec- OTHER MATTERS retary of State to keep records on SECTION 1. FUNCTIONS TRANSFERRED the ratification of amendments by FROM DEPARTMENT OF STATE TO AD- the States, beginning an historical MINISTRATOR OF GENERAL SERVICES pattern that continued until the There are hereby transferred to the Reorganization Plan No. 20 of Administrator of General Services the 1950 transferred the responsi- functions of the Secretary of State and the Department of State with respect bility from the Secretary of to: . . . (4) State. (c) The certification and publication of amendments to the Constitution of Certification, Publication, and the United States (. . . [1 U.S.C. Preservation Functions Vest- 106b]) and the preservation of such ed in the Administrator of amendments; General Services The message of the President transmitting the reorganization § 10.3 A Presidential reorga- plan included the following: nization plan transferred re- Since its establishment in 1789 the sponsibility for certification, Department of State has performed publication, and preserva- certain routine secretarial and record- tion of constitutional amend- keeping functions for the Federal Gov- ments from the Secretary of ernment which are entirely extraneous State to the Administrator of . . . to the conduct of foreign relations. While these activities do not properly General Services. belong in the Department, they were Under the authority of the Re- assigned to it and continued under its organization Act of 1949,(1) Presi- jurisdiction for want of an appropriate dent Harry S Truman transmitted agency for their performance.... Reorganization Plan No. 20 of Through the National Archives and 1950(2) to the Congress on Mar. Records Service the General Services Administration is especially staffed 13, 1950. and equipped for the conduct of activities of these types. 4. See § 10.3, infra. For an example of a State’s certificate of ratification sent to the Secretary of State with a Functions Vested in the Archi- copy laid before the House, see 76 vist of the United States CONG. REC. 35, 72d Cong. 2d Sess., Dec. 5, 1932. § 10.4 Archivist charged with 1. 63 Stat. 203 2. 5 USC App. Reorganization Plan No. printing and certifying adop- 20 of 1950. tion of amendments. 54

VerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:45 Jan 25, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00066 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 F:\PRECEDIT\VOL17\17COMP~1 27-2A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS Ch. 34 § 11

Effective Apr. 1, 1985, section § 11. State Consent; With- 106b of title 1, United States drawal and Rescission of Code, (1) was amended(2) to transfer from the Administrator of Withdrawal General Services to the newly established Archivist of the United Under Article V of the Constitu- States the responsibility for pub- tion, the approval of three-fourths lishing and certifying the adoption of the States is required to ratify of amendments to the Constitu- an amendment to the Constitu- tion. tion. Whether a State may rescind The Archivist of the United its ratification of a constitutional States first executed this responsi- amendment has been the subject bility under § 106b of title 1, ( ) ( ) United States Code, in 1992 when of discussion 1 and litigation. 2 A the 27th Amendment was pub- State, having previously rescinded lished and certified as having its ratification before the effective- been adopted.(3) ness of an amendment, has later ratified the amendment (after it 1. Section 106b of title 1, United States Code, reads as follows: had become effective). For exam- (3) § 106b. Amendments to Constitu- ple, on Mar. 12, 2003, the Ohio tion General Assembly passed a joint Whenever official notice is received resolution ratifying the 14th at the National Archives and Amendment. The joint resolution Records Administration that any amendment proposed to the Con- recited the history of Ohio’s action stitution of the United States has with respect to the 14th Amend- been adopted, according to the provi- ment, as follows: Ohio ratified the sions of the Constitution, the Archi- amendment on Jan. 11, 1867, but vist of the United States shall forth- rescinded such ratification on Jan. with cause the amendment to be published, with his certificate, speci- 15, 1868 (the amendment becom- fying the States by which the same ing effective six months later). may have been adopted, and that the same has become valid, to all intents 1. See 5 Hinds’ Precedents § 7042. and purposes, as a part of the Con- 2. For relevant case law, see House stitution of the United States. Rules and Manual § 192 (2007). 2. Section 107(d) of the National Ar- 3. The memorial was noted at 150 chives and Records Administration CONG. REC. 100, 108th Congress 2d Act of 1984 (Pub. L. No. 98–497; Oct. Sess., Jan. 20, 2004. See also Id. for 19, 1984, 98 Stat. 2291). a memorial from New Jersey revok- 3. House Rules and Manual § 258, foot- ing an earlier attempt to withdraw note 18 (2007). its ratification of an amendment.

VerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:45 Jan 25, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00067 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 F:\PRECEDIT\VOL17\17COMP~1 27-2A Ch. 34 § 12 DESCHLER-BROWN-JOHNSON PRECEDENTS

§ 12. Time Limits on Rati- tain a limit on the period for fication State ratification. The 18th Amendment was sub- Beginning with what became mitted to the States with the fol- the 18th Amendment, Congress lowing limitation on ratification: has generally imposed a time limit on the period for State ratifi- Section 3. This article shall be inop- cation of a proposed amendment. erative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitu- The customary time limit is seven tion by the legislatures of the several years from the date of the submis- States, as provided in the Constitution, sion of the proposed amendment within seven years from the date of the to the States by Congress. Ini- submission hereof to the States by the tially, these time limitations were Congress. made part of the text of the proposed amendment.(1) In recent § 12.2 Congress may include a practice, the limitation has been limitation on the time for made part of the text of the joint State ratification of a pro- resolution preceding the text of posed amendment to the the proposed amendment, rather Constitution in the joint res- than part of the text of the olution proposing the amend- amendment. In one case, a simple ment rather than in the body majority in both Houses extended of the amendment itself. the limitation when it was con- Rather than including a period tained in the joint resolution rath- for State ratification in the text of (2) er than the amendment itself. a proposed constitutional amend- In the case of the 27th Amend- ment itself, Congress may set ment, the ratification of which forth such a limitation in the text spanned an unusually long inter- of the joint resolution proposing val, each House of Congress separately declared the amendment such amendment. An example of duly ratified.(3) this form of limitation on a ratification period was included in Sen- f ate Joint Resolution 7 of the 92d § 12.1 A proposed amendment Congress, which was considered ( ) to the Constitution may con- by the House on Mar. 23, 1971, 1 and which became the 26th 1. See, e.g., U. S. Const. amend. 18 § 3. 2. See § 12.3, infra. 1. See 117 CONG. REC. 7570, 92d Cong. 3. See § 12.4, infra. 1st Sess.

VerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:45 Jan 25, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00068 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 F:\PRECEDIT\VOL17\17COMP~1 27-2A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS Ch. 34 § 12

Amendment. That resolution read Senate of House Joint Resolution as follows: 208 of the 92d Congress by the requisite two-thirds majority. S.J. RES. 7 That joint resolution included in Resolved by the Senate and House of its text a seven-year ratification Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled (two- limitation preceding the text of thirds of each House concurring there- the proposed amendment. The in), That the following article is pro- text of the joint resolution was as posed as an amendment to the Con- follows: stitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all intents and pur- H.J. RES. 208 poses as part of the Constitution when Resolved by the Senate and House of ratified by the legislatures of three- Representatives of the United States of fourths of the several States within America in Congress assembled (two- seven years from the date of its sub- thirds of each House concurring there- mission by the Congress: in), That the following article is pro- ‘‘ARTICLE —— posed as an amendment to the Con- stitution of the United States, which ‘‘SECTION 1. The right of citizens of shall be valid to all intents and pur- the United States, who are eighteen years of age or older, to vote shall poses as part of the Constitution when not be denied or abridged by the ratified by the legislatures of three- United States or by any State on ac- fourths of the several States within count of age. seven years from the date of its sub- ‘‘SEC. 2. The Congress shall have mission by the Congress: power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation. ‘‘ARTICLE —— ‘‘SECTION 1. Equality of rights § 12.3 The House by majority under the law shall not be denied or vote passed a joint resolution abridged by the United States or by extending the ratification pe- any State on account of sex. ‘‘SEC. 2. The Congress shall have riod for a constitutional the power to enforce, by appropriate amendment previously sub- legislation, the provisions of this ar- mitted to the States. ticle. ‘‘SEC. 3. This amendment shall A proposed constitutional take effect two years after the date amendment regarding equal of ratification.’’ rights on account of sex was sub- During 1978, with the ratifica- mitted to the States on Mar. 22, tion deadline for the proposed 1972,(1) upon the passage by the amendment approaching and with

1. 118 CONG. REC. 9598, 92d Cong. 2d majority and transmitted it to the Sess. The House had passed the joint Senate on Oct. 12, 1971. 117 CONG. resolution by the requisite two-thirds REC. 35815, 92d Cong. 1st Sess.

VerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:45 Jan 25, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00069 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 F:\PRECEDIT\VOL17\17COMP~1 27-2A Ch. 34 § 12 DESCHLER-BROWN-JOHNSON PRECEDENTS

fewer than the requisite number After holding that the resolu- of States having ratified the pro- tion did present a question of the posed amendment, Congress con- privileges of the House under sidered various proposals to ex- Rule IX,(4) the Speaker, Thomas tend the ratification period. On P. O’Neill, Jr., of Massachusetts, Aug. 15, 1978,(2) the House consid- directed the Clerk to report the ered a joint resolution to extend(3) resolution. The resolution was as the ratification period. Before the follows:

joint resolution was considered, H. RES. 1315 the House considered, and laid on Whereas H.J. Res. 638 of this Con- the table, a resolution considered gress amends H.J. Res. 208 of the as a question of the privileges of 92nd Congress, proposing an amend- the House declaring that a two- ment to the Constitution; Whereas H.J. Res. 208 of the 92nd thirds vote was necessary to pass Congress was passed by an affirma- the joint resolution extending the tive vote of two-thirds of the Mem- ratification period. The House bers present and voting, as required by Article V of the Constitution, and then passed the joint resolution by submitted for ratification on March majority vote. 22, 1972; The proceedings were as fol- Whereas the integrity of the process by which the House considers lows: changes to H.J. Res. 208 of the 92nd Mr. [James] QUILLEN [of Ten- Congress would be violated if H.J. nessee]. Mr. Speaker, I rise to a ques- Res. 638 were passed by a simple tion of the privileges of the House and majority of the Members present and voting; offer a privileged resolution (H. Res. Whereas the constitutional prerog- 1315) involving a question of the privi- atives of the House to propose leges of the House, and I ask for its amendments to the Constitution and immediate consideration. to impose necessary conditions there- to in accordance with Article V of the 2. 124 CONG. REC. 26203, 26204, Constitution would be abrogated if 26239, 26265, 95th Cong. 2d Sess. H.J. Res. 638 were passed by a simple majority of the Members present 3. Parliamentarian’s Note: Rule XIII and voting; clause 3 (the Ramseyer Rule), does Resolved, That an affirmative vote not apply to a joint resolution ex- of two-thirds of the Members present tending the period for State ratifica- and voting, a quorum being present, tion when the joint resolution does shall be required on final passage of H.J. Res. 638. not specifically, by amendment, change the text of the ratification The privileged resolution was deadline in the joint resolution by laid on the table. The House then which Congress submitted the resolved itself into the Committee amendment to the States but rather extends the period by a superseding 4. House Rules and Manual § 698 provision. Id. at p. 26204. (2007).

VerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:45 Jan 25, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00070 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 F:\PRECEDIT\VOL17\17COMP~1 27-2A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS Ch. 34 § 12

of the Whole to consider House for ratification 12 proposed Joint Resolution 638. The joint amendments. Of those 12, 10 were ( ) resolution read as follows: 5 ratified by Dec. 15, 1791,(2) and Resolved by the Senate and House of became the Bill of Rights. These Representatives of the United States of amendments were proposed with- America in Congress assembled, That notwithstanding any provision of out a deadline for ratification, and House Joint Resolution 208 of the the remaining two remained pend- Ninety-second Congress, second ses- ing before the States. In May of sion, to the contrary, the article of 1992, one of those proposed amendment proposed to the States in such joint resolution shall be valid to amendments, to limit the power of all intents and purposes as part of the Congress to increase the salaries Constitution when ratified by the legis- of its Members, was ratified by latures of three-fourths of the several States within fourteen years from the the 38th State (the number of date of the submission by the Congress States needed to constitute ratifi- to the States of such proposed article cation by the requisite three- of amendment. fourths of the States) and on May After debate and adoption of an 18, 1992, was declared by the Ar- amendment striking the matter chivist of the United States to beginning ‘‘within fourteen years’’ have been ratified. In light of the and all that follows and inserting unprecedented period of time be- ‘‘not later than June 30, 1982.’’, the House passed the joint resolu- tween submission of the amend- tion by a simple majority vote.(6) ment to the States and the ratification by the final State necessary § 12.4 The House adopted a for adoption of the amendment, concurrent resolution declar- and in order to quell speculation ing the ratification of a con- over the efficacy of a ratification stitutional amendment. process spanning two centuries, ( ) On Sept. 25, 1789,(1) the First the House adopted 3 a concurrent Congress submitted to the States resolution(4) declaring the ratification of the amendment. The con- 5. 124 CONG. REC. 26239, 95th Cong. current resolution read as follows: 2d Sess., Aug. 15, 1978. 6. After passage by the Senate, the 2. See § 10.1, supra. joint resolution was signed by the 3. 138 CONG. REC. 12051, 102d Cong. President but not assigned a public 2d Sess., May 20, 1992. The concur- law number. Upon receipt of the rent resolution was debated on the joint resolution, the Archivist noti- preceding day, May 19, 1992, Id. at fied the States of its passage. pp. 11779–85. 1. S. Jour. Vol. 1, p. 88, 1st Cong. 1st 4. The concurrent resolution was con- Sess. sidered under suspension of the

VerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:45 Jan 25, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00071 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 F:\PRECEDIT\VOL17\17COMP~1 27-2A Ch. 34 § 12 DESCHLER-BROWN-JOHNSON PRECEDENTS

H. CON. RES. 320 fect.(3) Neither body acted on the Resolved by the House of Representa- measure of the other.(4) tives (the Senate concurring), That Congress declares that the proposed 3. S. Res. 298 and S. Con. Res. 120 at article of amendment providing as fol- 138 CONG. REC. 11869, 11870, 102d lows: Cong. 2d Sess., May 20, 1992. The Senate adopted the two resolutions ‘‘No law, varying the compensation for the services of the Senators and by a single, en bloc vote of 99–0. Representatives, shall take effect, Earlier, the Senate had adopted a until an election of Representatives resolution requesting the Archivist shall have intervened.’’ to transmit to the Senate a list of has been ratified by a sufficient num- States having ratified the amend- ber of the States and has become a ment. S. Res. 295, at 138 CONG. REC. part of the Constitution. 11010, 102d Cong. 2d Sess., May 12, 1992. On the same day, the Senate 4. For Supreme Court decisions rel- adopted both a simple and a con- evant to the ratification process gen- current resolution to the same ef- erally, see Dillon v. Gloss, 256 U.S. 368 (1921) (ratification must be rules. The House had previously con- within a reasonable time after pro- sidered by unanimous consent a posal); Coleman v. Miller, 307 U.S. similar measure declaring the 14th 433 (1939) (efficacy of State ratifica- Amendment ratified. See H. Jour. tion of proposed amendments is a po- 1126, 1127, 40th Cong. 2d Sess., litical question upon which Congress July 21, 1868. must make the final determination).

VerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:45 Jan 25, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00072 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 F:\PRECEDIT\VOL17\17COMP~1 27-2A INDEX TO PRECEDENTS Amendments to joint resolution posing amendment to Constitution passed by other House (see also Special rules providing for concur in amendments, motion to, re- consideration of joint resolutions quires two-thirds vote in House in proposing amendments to Con- which joint resolution originated stitution) House joint resolution, § 8.2 generally, §§ 4.6, 4.7 Senate joint resolution, § 8.3 amendment in nature of substitute to vote, majority, to adopt, §§ 8, 8.1 joint resolution, rule provided for vote, two-thirds, required for passage consideration of, §§ 4.4, 4.17 of joint resolution after amendments special rule, pursuant to, §§ 4.6, 4.7 adopted, § 8 Compensation of Members of Con- Amendments to joint resolution, see gress, amendment relating to Joint resolution proposing amend- power to increase, § 12.4 ment to Constitution; Voting Conference report on joint resolu- Archivist of the United States, role tion see Passage of joint resolution, pro- vote, two-thirds, required for adoption, cedures after; Ratification, proce- §7 dures relating to yeas and nays not required for adop- Article V of Constitution as pre- tion in House, § 7 scribing procedures, § 1 Consideration of joint resolutions Assembly of Congress, amendment proposing amendments to Con- relating to, § 5.3 stitution (see also Subject matter Bill of Rights, ratification of (see also of proposed constitutional Ratification, procedures relating amendment) to), §§ 10.1, 12.4 generally, § 4 Budget, balanced, amendment relat- amendments to joint resolution ing to, §§ 4.4, 4.6, 4.7, 4.13, 4.14, 4.17 other House, adopted by, see Certification and publication of Amendments to joint resolu- amendment after adoption, see tion passed by other House Ratification, procedures relating voting on, see Voting to debate, see Debate Committee jurisdiction over joint discharge of joint resolution, consider- resolutions proposing amend- ation in House following (see also ments generally, Discharge), § 4.10 history, §§ 3–3.2 President, not presented to, for ap- Judiciary, Committee on the, jurisdic- proval, § 2 tion of, §§ 3, 3.2 quorum required for final passage (see subject matter of amendment as not af- also Voting), §§ 5, 5.1 fecting jurisdiction of Committee on resolving clause the Judiciary, § 3.2 amendment from floor corrected form Committee of the Whole, consider- of, § 4.17 ation in, of joint resolution pro- form, §§ 2, 4.17

VerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:45 Jan 25, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00073 Fmt 8876 Sfmt 8876 F:\PRECEDIT\VOL17\17COMP~1 27-2A Ch. 34 DESCHLER–BROWN–JOHNSON PRECEDENTS

Consideration of joint resolutions Debate—Cont. proposing amendments to Con- unanimous consent, modification of stitution (see also Subject matter terms of special rule governing de- of proposed constitutional bate, § 4.13 amendment)—Cont. Discharge statute prescribing form, §§ 2, 4.17 debate on motion to discharge, §§ 4.11, Senate, in, see Senate, proceedings 4.12 in joint resolution, of special rules, under, see Special rules consideration in House after dis- providing for consideration of charge, § 4.10 joint resolutions proposing House, consideration in, after dis- amendments to Constitution charge, § 4.10 suspension of the rules, under, §§ 4.1, motion to proceed to immediate con- 4.2 sideration is privileged after adop- voting generally, see Voting tion of motion to discharge, § 4.9 Debate signatures required, § 4.8 amendment to joint resolution recommit joint resolution, motion to, previous question, priority in rec- following discharge, see Recommit ognition to Member seeking to joint resolution, motion to move, over Member yielded to for special rule providing for consideration purpose of offering amendment, of joint resolution, discharge of § 4.16 Calendar, Discharge, substitute rule substitute, amendment in nature of, reported prior to call of, § 4.14 form of, § 4.17 debate on motion, § 4.12 voting on, see Voting subsequent rule reported prior to call discharge, motion to, debate on (see of Discharge Calendar where first also Discharge), §§ 4.11, 4.12 rule was object of motion to dis- previous question, priority in recogni- charge, § 4.14 tion to Member seeking to move, unanimous consent, consideration of over Member yielded to for purpose rule by, before motion called up, of offering amendment, § 4.16 § 4.13 recognition vote on joint resolution considered previous question, priority in rec- under discharge process, see Voting ognition to Member seeking to move, over Member yielded to for District of Columbia, amendment purpose of offering amendment, granting representation in Elec- § 4.16 toral College to, § 9.2 special rule, pursuant to Eighteen-year-olds, amendment close debate, recognition to, where granting right to vote to, § 12.2 rule divided control of debate Election of President and Vice Presi- among three Members, § 4.7 dent, amendment regarding (see reported, where joint resolution was Subject matter of proposed con- not, § 4.6 stitutional amendment) unanimous consent, modification by, Committee, referred to, under former of terms governing debate, § 4.13 practice, § 3.1

VerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:45 Jan 25, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00074 Fmt 8876 Sfmt 8876 F:\PRECEDIT\VOL17\17COMP~1 27-2A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS Ch. 34

Election of President and Vice Presi- Joint resolution proposing amend- dent, amendment regarding (see ment to Constitution (see Subject Subject matter of proposed con- matter of proposed constitu- stitutional amendment)—Cont. tional amendment)—Cont. reported with amendment, joint resolu- form, §§ 2, 4.17 tion was, § 3.1 statute prescribing form, §§ 2, 4.17 Equal rights for men and women, Senate, consideration in, see Senate, amendment concerning, §§ 4.11, proceedings in 12.3 voting generally, see Voting Flag, desecration of, amendment re- Judiciary, Committee on the, has ju- lating to, § 6.4 risdiction over joint resolutions Joint resolution proposing amend- proposing amendments, §§ 3, 3.2 ment to Constitution (see Subject Jurisdiction, committee, see Com- matter of proposed constitu- mittee jurisdiction over joint reso- tional amendment) lutions proposing amendments amendment in nature of substitute to Legislative proposal, effect to con- form, § 4.17 vert, to proposal to amend Con- amendments to stitution, §§ 4.15, 6, 6.3 voting on, see Voting Passage of joint resolution, procedures after (see Ratification, pro- conference report on, see Conference cedures relating to) report on joint resolution enrolled joint resolution submitted to consideration designated official for transmission generally, § 4 to States, § 9.2 special rule, under, see Special President, joint resolution not pre- rules providing for consider- sented to, for approval, §§ 2, 9, 9.1 ation of joint resolutions pro- states, submission to, § 9.2 posing amendments to Con- submission of enrolled joint resolution stitution to designated official for trans- suspension of rules, under, §§ 4.1, 4.2 mission to states, § 9.2 form of resolving clause, § 2 Poll tax, amendment to abolish, germane, instructions in motion to re- §§ 4.1, 4.15, 6.3 commit bill held not to be, where re- Prayer in public buildings, amend- quiring that content of bill be re- ment concerning, §§ 4.8, 4.9, 4.16 ported as joint resolution, § 4.15 Present and voting, two-thirds of President, not presented to, for ap- Members, as required, see Voting proval, § 2 Presidential and Vice Presidential quorum required for final passage (see succession, see Subject matter of Voting) §§ 5, 5.1 proposed amendment recommit bill, instructions in motion President, joint resolution proposing to, were not germane where requir- amendment not presented to, for ing that content of bill be reported as approval, §§ 2, 9, 9.1 joint resolution, § 4.15 Procedures for amendment to Con- resolving clause stitution amendment to correct form of, § 4.17 Article V as prescribing, § 1

VerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:45 Jan 25, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00075 Fmt 8876 Sfmt 8876 F:\PRECEDIT\VOL17\17COMP~1 27-2A Ch. 34 DESCHLER–BROWN–JOHNSON PRECEDENTS

Procedures for amendment to Con- Ratification, procedures relating stitution—Cont. to—Cont. Committee jurisdiction over joint reso- effectiveness of ratification lution, §§ 3-3.2 declarations, separate, by two Congress may propose amendment, § 1 Houses in simple and concurrent convention requested by states, § 1 resolutions concerning, § 12.4 Joint resolution introduced in Congress political question for Congress to de- consideration generally, see Joint termine, § 12.4 resolution proposing amend- notification of ratification by states ment to Constitution Archivist of the United States, role President, not presented to, for ap- of, §§ 10, 10.4, 12.4 proval, § 2 historical development of procedures, resolving clause, form of, § 2 §§ 10–10.4 Procedures for consideration of joint rescission of ratification by state, § 11 resolution, see Consideration of Secretary of State, former role of, joint resolutions proposing amend- §§ 10.2, 10.3 ments to Constitution States, submission of proposed amend- Prohibition of liquors, amendment ment to, see States, submission of concerning, §§ 8.3, 12.1 proposed amendment to Quorum for consideration, see Vot- Supreme Court, decisions by ing effectiveness of ratification as polit- Ratification, procedures relating to ical question for Congress, § 12.4 Archivist of the United States, role of reasonable time, ratification within, certification and publication, §§ 10, § 12.4 10.4, 12.4 time limits on ratification notification of ratification by states extension of time limit, majority vote given by Archivist, §§ 10, 10.4, 12.4 on joint resolution to grant, where time limit for ratification, extension time limit was not part of amend- of, notification to states of, § 12.3 ment, § 12.3 Bill of Rights, President notified Con- no time limits applied to earlier gress of ratification of, § 10.1 amendments, § 12.4 certification and publication reasonable time, ratification must be Administrator of General Services, within, § 12.4 duties formerly vested in, §§ 10.3, salaries of Members of Congress, 10.4 amendment to limit power of Archivist of the United States, role Members to raise, ratified after of, §§ 10, 10.4, 12.4 two centuries, § 12.4 Reorganization Plan transferred seven years as customary limit, functions to designated official, §§ 12–12.3 § 10.3 text of amendment, stated in, under Secretary of State, former role of, earlier practice, §§ 12, 12.1 §§ 10.2, 10.3 text of joint resolution, stated in, statute transferred functions to Ar- rather than in amendment itself in chivist of the United States, § 10.4 current practice, §§ 12.2, 12.3

VerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:45 Jan 25, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00076 Fmt 8876 Sfmt 8876 F:\PRECEDIT\VOL17\17COMP~1 27-2A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS Ch. 34

Ratification, procedures relating Special rules providing for consider- to—Cont. ation of joint resolutions pro- withdrawal of ratification by State, posing amendments to Constitu- §11 tion Recognition, see Debate adoption, vote required for, § 4.8 Recommit joint resolution, motion to amendment in nature of substitute to discharge, where joint resolution being joint resolution, rule providing for, to considered pursuant to motion to, be considered in Committee of the § 4.11 Whole, § 4.4 Recommit, motion to, with instruc- amendment in nature of substitute to tions to report contents of bill in joint resolution, rule providing for, to form of joint resolution proposing be considered in House, § 4.3 to amend Constitution, § 4.15 amendments in nature of substitute to Rescission or withdrawal of ratifica- joint resolution, multiple, rule pro- tion, see Ratification, procedures viding for, § 4.4 relating to debate, modification of terms gov- Salaries of Members of Congress, erning, by unanimous consent, § 4.13 limitation on power to increase, debate, provisions concerning § 12.4 division between Member in favor School busing, amendment con- and Member opposed, § 4.6 cerning, § 4.10 three Members, control of time di- Senate, proceedings in vided among, § 4.7 amendment to joint resolution pro- discharge of House committee from posing constitutional amendment consideration of similar Senate joint vote, adopted by majority, §§ 6, 6.2, resolution, rule provided for, § 4.5 6.3 discharge of special rule, see Dis- conference report on joint resolution, charge see Conference report on joint vote required for adoption, § 4.8 resolution States, memorials or applications legislative proposal was converted by submitted by amendment to proposal to amend committee jurisdiction of, § 3 constitution, §§ 6, 6.3 conventions, requesting, § 1 voting rescinding request for convention, § 1 amendment to joint resolution to amend Constitution, majority vote States, submission of proposed required for, §§ 6, 6.2, 6.3 amendment to (see Ratification, legislative proposal converted by procedures relating to) amendment to proposal to amend generally, § 9.2 Constitution, §§ 6, 6.3 Archivist of the United States, role of, present and voting, two-thirds of § 9.2 Senators, required for passage of Subject matter of proposed constitu- joint resolution to amend Constitu- tional amendment tion, §§ 6.1, 6.3 assembly of Congress, § 5.3 yeas and nays not required on vote on Bill of Rights, see Bill of Rights, rati- passage, § 6.4 fication of

VerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:45 Jan 25, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00077 Fmt 8876 Sfmt 8876 F:\PRECEDIT\VOL17\17COMP~1 27-2A Ch. 34 DESCHLER–BROWN–JOHNSON PRECEDENTS

Subject matter of proposed constitu- Subject matter of proposed constitutional amendment—Cont. tional amendment—Cont. budget, balanced, provision as to, women, equal rights for, §§ 4.11, 12.3 §§ 4.4, 4.6, 4.7, 4.13, 4.14, 4.17 Suspension of rules, consideration of Committee on the Judiciary, jurisdic- joint resolution proposing con- tion of, as not affected by, § 3.2 stitutional amendment under compensation of Members of Congress, poll tax, amendment to abolish, § 4.1 proposals to change, § 12.4 Time limits on ratification, see Rati- Congress, salaries of Members of, limi- fication, procedures relating to tation on power to increase, § 12.4 Voting District of Columbia, granting rep- amendments to joint resolution, motion resentation in electoral college to, to concur in, requires two-thirds vote § 9.2 in House in which joint resolution eighteen-year-olds, right to vote grant- originated, §§ 8.2, 8.3 ed to, § 12.2 amendment to joint resolution, major- election of President and Vice Presi- ity vote required for adoption of, §§ 5, dent, §§ 3.1, 5.1 5.3, 8, 8.1 equal rights for men and women, conference report, see Conference re- §§ 4.11, 12.3 port on joint resolution flag, desecration of, § 6.4 joint resolution, two-thirds vote re- jurisdiction of Committee on the Judi- quired for passage of, §§ 2, 4.12, 5, ciary as not affected by, § 3.2 5.1 poll tax, amendment to abolish, §§ 4.1, present and voting, two-thirds of Mem- 4.15, 6.3 bers, required for passage, § 5.1 prayer in public buildings, §§ 4.8, 4.9, voice vote, question on final passage of 4.16 joint resolution first put to, § 5 President and Vice President, election yeas and nays not required for passage of, §§ 3.1, 5.1 of joint resolution to amend Con- Presidential and Vice Presidential suc- stitution, §§ 5, 5.4 cession, §§ 4.5, 8.1 Voting rights, amendments to grant, President, term of office of, §§ 8.2, 9.2 see, Subject matter of proposed prohibition of liquors, §§ 8.3, 12.1 constitutional amendment referenda on war, §§ 4.12, 5.2 War, referenda on, amendment con- salaries of Members of Congress, limi- cerning, §§ 4.12, 5.2 tation on power to increase, § 12.4 Withdrawal or rescission of ratifica- school busing, § 4.10 tion, see Ratification, procedures states, suits against, § 10.2 relating to term of office of President, §§ 8.2, 9.2 Yeas and nays not required on pas- voting rights, §§ 6.1, 12.2 sage of joint resolution (see Vot- war, referenda on, §§ 4.12, 5.2 ing), §§ 5, 5.4

VerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:45 Jan 25, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00078 Fmt 8876 Sfmt 8876 F:\PRECEDIT\VOL17\17COMP~1 27-2A