DOCSLIB.ORG

§72. Closing Debate; Sen- Ate Cloture

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
§72. Closing Debate; Sen- Ate Cloture Ch. 29 § 71 DESCHLER-BROWN PRECEDENTS CONFERENCE REPORT (H. REPT. 94– rules. The minority has 30 minutes 120) and the majority has 30 minutes on The committee of conference on the conference report. the disagreeing votes of the two MR. BAUMAN: I am talking about the Houses on the amendment of the lack of protection contained in the re- Senate to the bill (H.R. 2166) to quest for the 1-hour special order that amend the Internal Revenue Code of was just made by the gentleman from 1954...having met, after full and Oregon. free conference, have agreed to rec- THE SPEAKER: Any Member of the ommend and do recommend to their House may make a request for a spe- respective Houses as follows: cial order. That the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of MR. BAUMAN: I withdraw my res- the Senate and agree to the same ervation of objection. with an amendment as follows: In MR. [HERMAN T.] SCHNEEBELI [of lieu of the matter proposed to be in- Pennsylvania]: Mr. Speaker, further serted by the Senate amendment in- reserving the right to object, I also ask sert the following: for a 60-minute special order following that of the gentleman from Oregon SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF (Mr. Ullman). CONTENTS. THE SPEAKER: Is there objection to (a) SHORT TITLE.—This Act may be the request of the gentleman from cited as the ‘‘Tax Reduction Act of Pennsylvania? 1975’’.... There was no objection. MR. ULLMAN: Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that upon the adoption of the rule I be granted a 60- minute special order. § 72. Closing Debate; Sen- THE SPEAKER: (5) Is there objection to ate Cloture the request of the gentleman from Or- egon? In the House, secondary mo- MR. [ROBERT E.] BAUMAN [of Mary- tions—to lay on the table or for land]: Reserving the right to object, the previous question—can be Mr. Speaker, we have in the rules (6) of the House an adequate rule for used to cut off debate. Debate the consideration of conference reports can, of course, be limited or closed .... I have no way of knowing, nor by unanimous consent. When the does any Member in this Chamber House is operating ‘‘as in the know, who will control the time during Committee of the Whole,’’ both the a special order, except the gentleman motion for the previous question from Oregon, whether questions, once and the motion to limit debate can raised, will be answered, or whether or not debate will deteriorate into par- be utilized. tisan debate. In contrast to the House, where THE SPEAKER: The gentleman is very the hour rule limits debate, Mem- effectively but improperly stating the 6. See §§ 72.1 et seq., infra, for the pre- 5. Carl Albert (Okla.). vious question and its effect. 11010 CONSIDERATION AND DEBATE Ch. 29 § 72 bers of the Senate may retain the Closing and opening debate generally, floor for indefinite periods of time, see § 7, supra. unless the Senate limits debate ei- Motions which close debate, see Ch. 23, ther by unanimous consent or by supra (previous question, lay on the invoking cloture.(7) Thus, a Sen- table). ator may retain the floor for ex- Order of recognition determines who may tremely long periods of time, en- close debate, see §§ 12 et seq., supra. gaging in a ‘‘filibuster’’ to prevent Question of consideration to close debate, see § 5, supra. Senate action on a measure.(8) On Role of manager and management by re- June 12 and 13, 1935, Senator porting committee in closing debate, Huey Long, of Louisiana, in a re- see §§ 24, 26, supra. markable demonstration of phys- ical endurance, set a new record in the Senate when he spoke con- tinuously for 151⁄2 hours in favor Previous Question; Used Before of the Gore amendment to the Adoption of Rules proposed extension of the Na- tional Industrial Recovery Act. § 72.1 The Member controlling But the amendment was finally debate on a proposition in tabled. Again, in 1953, a pro- the House may move the pre- longed debate took place on the vious question and cut off so-called tidelands offshore oil bill. further debate. It began Apr. 1 and ended May 5. On Jan. 4, 1965,(10) at the con- The debate lasted for 35 days, one vening of the 89th Congress and of the longest on record. During before the adoption of the rules, this debate Senator Wayne Morse, of Oregon, established a new rec- Mr. Carl Albert, of Oklahoma, of- ord for the longest single speech. fered a resolution and after some On Apr. 24 and 25 he spoke for 22 debate moved the previous ques- hours and 26 minutes.(9) tion: Cross References MR. ALBERT: Mr. Speaker, I offer a resolution (H. Res. 2) and ask for its Closing debate in the Committee of the immediate consideration. Whole, see §§ 76 (general debate) and The Clerk read as follows: 78 (five-minute debate), infra. H. RES. 2 7. See Riddick/Frumin, Senate Proce- dure, S. Doc. No. 101–28, 101st Resolved, That the Speaker is hereby authorized and directed to Cong. 2d Sess. (1992). administer the oath of office to the 8. See 8 Cannon’s Precedents § 2866. 9. See 103 CONG. REC. 173, 174, 85th 10. 111 CONG. REC. 20, 89th Cong. 1st Cong. 1st Sess., Jan. 4, 1957. Sess. 11011 Ch. 29 § 72 DESCHLER-BROWN PRECEDENTS gentleman from New York, Mr. Rich- THE SPEAKER: Does the gentleman ard L. Ottinger. from Oklahoma yield to the gentleman from Mississippi for the purpose of MR. ALBERT: Mr. Speaker, again this is a resolution involving a Member submitting a parliamentary inquiry? whose certificate of election in due MR. ALBERT: Mr. Speaker, I move form is on file in the Office of the the previous question on the resolu- Clerk. I ask for the adoption of the res- tion. olution. THE SPEAKER: The question is on the motion. MR. [JAMES C.] CLEVELAND [of New Hampshire]: Mr. Speaker, will the gen- The previous question was ordered. ( ) tleman yield for a parliamentary in- The resolution was agreed to. 11 quiry? MR. ALBERT: I yield for a parliamen- Moving the Previous Question tary inquiry. MR. CLEVELAND: If this resolution is § 72.2 The motion for the pre- adopted, will it be impossible for me to vious question is not debat- offer my own resolution pertaining to able. the same subject matter, either as an (12) amendment or a substitute? On Jan. 3, 1949, at the con- THE SPEAKER: If the resolution is vening of the 81st Congress, the agreed to, it will not be in order for the House was considering House gentleman to offer a substitute resolu- Resolution 5, amending the rules tion or an amendment, particularly if of the House. Mr. Adolph J. the previous question is ordered. Sabath, of Illinois, who had of- MR. CLEVELAND: Is it now in order, Mr. Speaker? fered the resolution, moved the THE SPEAKER: Not unless the gen- previous question. Mr. John E. tleman from Oklahoma yields to the Rankin, of Mississippi, sought rec- gentleman for that purpose.... ognition to offer an amendment in MR. CLEVELAND: Will the gentleman the nature of a substitute and ob- from Oklahoma yield for that purpose? jected that he had a ‘‘right to be MR. ALBERT: Mr. Speaker, I yield for heard.’’ Speaker Sam Rayburn, of a question and a very brief statement. Texas, held that the previous I do not yield for a speech. question was not debatable. MR. CLEVELAND: May I inquire if the ( ) gentleman will yield so that I may ask On Sept. 13, 1965, 13 Mr. Carl for unanimous consent that certain Albert, of Oklahoma, moved that remarks of mine pertaining to this matter be incorporated in the Record? 11. 87 CONG. REC. 2177, 2178, 77th MR. ALBERT: No, Mr. Speaker, I Cong. 1st Sess. move the previous question. 12. 95 CONG. REC. 10, 81st Cong. 1st MR. [THOMAS G.] ABERNETHY [of Sess. Mississippi]: Mr. Speaker, a par- 13. 111 CONG. REC. 23601, 89th Cong. liamentary inquiry. 1st Sess. 11012 CONSIDERATION AND DEBATE Ch. 29 § 72 the Journal be approved as read Use of Previous Question and moved the previous question Where Debate Limited by on the motion. Mr. Durward G. Unanimous Consent Hall, of Missouri, stated a par- liamentary inquiry: § 72.3 Where the House by Is not debate in order on this motion unanimous consent fixed the inasmuch as under [the House rules] time and control of debate, it there has been no debate on ordering was held that the Members the previous question? in control were not required THE SPEAKER: (14) The Chair will state that the motion on the previous to consume or to yield all the question is not debatable. The question time provided for. is on ordering the previous question on ( ) the motion to approve the Journal.(15) On Mar. 11, 1941, 17 the House Parliamentarian’s Note: Mr. was considering House Resolution Hall’s reference was to clause 3 131 under the terms of a unani- (now clause 2) of Rule XXVII, pro- mous-consent agreement pro- viding 40 minutes’ debate after viding two hours of debate and di- the previous question has been or- viding control of debate between dered, if the proposition on which Mr. Sol Bloom, of New York, and the motion has been made is de- Mr. Hamilton Fish, Jr., of New batable but has not been de- York, and providing that the pre- (16) bated. vious question be considered as 14. John W. McCormack (Mass.).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • June 15, 2021 Parliamentary Procedure Seminar
    June 15, 2021 Parliamentary Procedure Seminar Members have rights: [1:4, RONR1] Attend meetings Make motions Speak in debate Vote Altering the rights of members requires you to amend the bylaws! 10 Mistakes you learned from TV 1. Misuse of the gavel Rap once to signal call to order and adjournment. 2. Calling the question The motion to “Call the question” or to “Move the previous question” is not in order when another has the floor. It requires a second, is not debatable, and requires a 2/3 vote for approval. 3. Ex officio members can’t vote Ex officio members can vote just like other members unless the bylaws say otherwise. 4. Minutes The minutes should be a record of what was DONE at the meeting and not what was said by the members. 5. Applying open meeting laws or Frequently, neither applies. Usually the assembly US Constitution to private clubs may meet in executive session and may limit debate. 6. President is all-powerful The president has only those powers given by the members. They are usually stated in the bylaws or in an adopted motion. 7. Executive Board is all-powerful The board’s power to overturn actions of the membership is limited. 8. “Talk Show” Decorum The chairman is responsible for maintaining decorum at all times. 9. Tabling motions Normally the motion “postpone to a definite time” is meant instead. 10. Who seconded the motion? It is not required that the seconder of a motion be recorded in the minutes or even identified at all. 1 “RONR” is an abbreviation parliamentarians use to cite Henry M.
    [Show full text]
  • Commencement Speaker Committee
    Governance & Policies Effective: October 1997 University Governance Committees Which Are Modified by the Faculty Senate COMMENCEMENT SPEAKER COMMITTEE Approved: updated, fall 2009 Faculty Senate Bylaws Committee Membership 1. The committee is composed of one representative from each of the following four academic units: Education, Humanities, Science/Math, and Social Sciences, and one member from the non-school faculty, all elected by Faculty Senate for overlapping two-year terms. No representative may serve more than two consecutive terms. 2. Two student representatives serve on the committee. One is the chairperson of the University Board Speakers Committee and one is selected by the Student Senate for a one-year term. 3. The vice president for university advancement, who shall also serve as convener of the committee, and the director of student activities shall be members of the committee. 4. The terms of office begin 1 October, and the committee shall meet at least one time per year, usually during the fall semester, but at other times at the call of the convener or a majority of the members of the committee. Functions 1. The committee shall generate a pool of potential commencement speakers for consideration by the University president. 2. The pool shall be broadly representative in terms of race, gender, and academic discipline, and may include other considerations in order to promote enhanced diversity. 3. The speakers for the spring and winter commencements shall be drawn from the pool generated each fall by the committee. In the event a speaker cannot be obtained from the pool, nothing in this policy shall prevent the University administration from obtaining a commencement speaker from other avenues.
    [Show full text]
  • Motions Explained
    MOTIONS EXPLAINED Adjournment: Suspension of proceedings to another time or place. To adjourn means to suspend until a later stated time or place. Recess: Bodies are released to reassemble at a later time. The members may leave the meeting room, but are expected to remain nearby. A recess may be simply to allow a break (e.g. for lunch) or it may be related to the meeting (e.g. to allow time for vote‐counting). Register Complaint: To raise a question of privilege that permits a request related to the rights and privileges of the assembly or any of its members to be brought up. Any time a member feels their ability to serve is being affected by some condition. Make Body Follow Agenda: A call for the orders of the day is a motion to require the body to conform to its agenda or order of business. Lay Aside Temporarily: A motion to lay the question on the table (often simply "table") or the motion to postpone consideration is a proposal to suspend consideration of a pending motion. Close Debate: A motion to the previous question (also known as calling for the question, calling the question, close debate and other terms) is a motion to end debate, and the moving of amendments, on any debatable or amendable motion and bring that motion to an immediate vote. Limit or extend debate: The motion to limit or extend limits of debate is used to modify the rules of debate. Postpone to a certain time: In parliamentary procedure, a postponing to a certain time or postponing to a time certain is an act of the deliberative assembly, generally implemented as a motion.
    [Show full text]
  • Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes
    Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes In order to have a record of meetings it is important to take minutes of the meeting. Many automotive instructors are unsure what should be included in the minutes and how much detail is required for future reference. Keep in mind that the minutes are a formal record of the meeting and should provide enough information so that anyone could review them and have a good understanding of the issues, the discussion, and the actions taken. It’s helpful to have an agenda for your meeting to move the meeting along smoothly. At a minimum, the following information should be included in the Advisory Committee meeting minutes: 1. Date, location, and time 2. List of members who attend and members who are absent 3. Old Business – review and approval of minutes from the last meeting 4. Discuss agenda items – summarize the discussion of each of the topics. If there was a motion for action, record who made and who seconded the motion as well as the results of the vote. 5. New Business (if any) 6. Set a date for the next meeting 7. Note the time of adjournment Please remember the NATEF Standards require that Advisory Committees review and provide input on programs. A summary of the specific standards that Advisory Committees should review are listed in Procedures Section in the Program Standards. Make sure that your minutes reflect a review of these topics. All these items may not be reviewed during the same meeting, but they must be reviewed. Meeting minutes may be recorded by anyone at the meeting, but the person responsible for conducting the meeting should not be responsible for recording the minutes.
    [Show full text]
  • Absolute Voting Rules Adrian Vermeule
    University of Chicago Law School Chicago Unbound Coase-Sandor Working Paper Series in Law and Coase-Sandor Institute for Law and Economics Economics 2005 Absolute Voting Rules Adrian Vermeule Follow this and additional works at: https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/law_and_economics Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Adrian Vermeule, "Absolute Voting Rules" (John M. Olin Program in Law and Economics Working Paper No. 257, 2005). This Working Paper is brought to you for free and open access by the Coase-Sandor Institute for Law and Economics at Chicago Unbound. It has been accepted for inclusion in Coase-Sandor Working Paper Series in Law and Economics by an authorized administrator of Chicago Unbound. For more information, please contact [email protected]. CHICAGO JOHN M. OLIN LAW & ECONOMICS WORKING PAPER NO. 257 (2D SERIES) Absolute Voting Rules Adrian Vermeule THE LAW SCHOOL THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO August 2005 This paper can be downloaded without charge at: The Chicago Working Paper Series Index: http://www.law.uchicago.edu/Lawecon/index.html and at the Social Science Research Network Electronic Paper Collection: http://ssrn.com/abstract_id=791724 Absolute Voting Rules Adrian Vermeule* The theory of voting rules developed in law, political science, and economics typically compares simple majority rule with alternatives, such as various types of supermajority rules1 and submajority rules.2 There is another critical dimension to these questions, however. Consider the following puzzles: $ In the United States Congress, the votes of a majority of those present and voting are necessary to approve a law.3 In the legislatures of California and Minnesota,4 however, the votes of a majority of all elected members are required.
    [Show full text]
  • Simplified Parliamentary Procedure
    Extension to Communities Simplifi ed Parliamentary Procedure 2 • Iowa State University Extension Introduction Effective Meetings — Simplifi ed Parliamentary Procedure “We must learn to run a meeting without victimizing the audience; but more impor- tantly, without being victimized by individuals who are armed with parliamentary procedure and a personal agenda.” — www.calweb.com/~laredo/parlproc.htm Parliamentary procedure. Sound complicated? Controlling? Boring? Intimidating? Why do we need to know all those rules for conducting a meeting? Why can’t we just run the meetings however we want to? Who cares if we follow parliamentary procedure? How many times have you attended a meeting that ran on and on and didn’t accomplish anything? The meeting jumps from one topic to another without deciding on anything. Group members disrupt the meeting with their own personal agendas. Arguments erupt. A few people make all the decisions and ignore everyone else’s opinions. Everyone leaves the meeting feeling frustrated. Sound familiar? Then a little parliamentary procedure may just be the thing to turn your unproductive, frustrating meetings into a thing of beauty — or at least make them more enjoyable and productive. What is Parliamentary Procedure? Parliamentary procedure is a set of well proven rules designed to move business along in a meeting while maintaining order and controlling the communications process. Its purpose is to help groups accomplish their tasks through an orderly, democratic process. Parliamentary procedure is not intended to inhibit a meeting with unnecessary rules or to prevent people from expressing their opinions. It is intended to facilitate the smooth func- tioning of the meeting and promote cooperation and harmony among members.
    [Show full text]
  • Minutes of the Federal Open Market Committee April 27–28, 2021
    _____________________________________________________________________________________________Page 1 Minutes of the Federal Open Market Committee April 27–28, 2021 A joint meeting of the Federal Open Market Committee Ann E. Misback, Secretary, Office of the Secretary, and the Board of Governors was held by videoconfer- Board of Governors ence on Tuesday, April 27, 2021, at 9:30 a.m. and con- tinued on Wednesday, April 28, 2021, at 9:00 a.m.1 Matthew J. Eichner,2 Director, Division of Reserve Bank Operations and Payment Systems, Board of PRESENT: Governors; Michael S. Gibson, Director, Division Jerome H. Powell, Chair of Supervision and Regulation, Board of John C. Williams, Vice Chair Governors; Andreas Lehnert, Director, Division of Thomas I. Barkin Financial Stability, Board of Governors Raphael W. Bostic Michelle W. Bowman Sally Davies, Deputy Director, Division of Lael Brainard International Finance, Board of Governors Richard H. Clarida Mary C. Daly Jon Faust, Senior Special Adviser to the Chair, Division Charles L. Evans of Board Members, Board of Governors Randal K. Quarles Christopher J. Waller Joshua Gallin, Special Adviser to the Chair, Division of Board Members, Board of Governors James Bullard, Esther L. George, Naureen Hassan, Loretta J. Mester, and Eric Rosengren, Alternate William F. Bassett, Antulio N. Bomfim, Wendy E. Members of the Federal Open Market Committee Dunn, Burcu Duygan-Bump, Jane E. Ihrig, Kurt F. Lewis, and Chiara Scotti, Special Advisers to the Patrick Harker, Robert S. Kaplan, and Neel Kashkari, Board, Division of Board Members, Board of Presidents of the Federal Reserve Banks of Governors Philadelphia, Dallas, and Minneapolis, respectively Carol C. Bertaut, Senior Associate Director, Division James A.
    [Show full text]
  • Parliamentary Procedures at a Glance
    Parliamentary Procedures at a Glance To Do This (1) You Say This: May You Must You Be Is the Motion Is the Motion What Vote is Interrupt the Seconded? Debatable? Amendable? Required? Speaker? Adjourn the meeting “I move that we May not interrupt (before all business is Must be seconded Not debatable Not amendable Majority vote required adjourn.” Speaker complete). “I move that we recess May not interrupt Recess the meeting Must be seconded Not debatable Amendable Majority vote required until ...” Speaker Complain about noise, room temperature, etc. “Point of Privilege” May interrupt Speaker No second needed Not debatable (2) Not amendable No vote required (3) Suspend further May not interrupt consideration of “I move we table it.” Must be seconded Not debatable Not amendable Majority vote required Speaker something End debate “I move the May not interrupt Must be seconded Debatable Amendable Two-thirds Postpone consideration “I move we postpone May not interrupt Two-thirds vote Must be seconded Debatable Amendable of something this matter until...” Speaker required Have something “I move we refer this May not interrupt Must be seconded Debatable Amendable Majority vote required studied further to a committee Speaker “I move that this May not interrupt Amend a motion motion be amended Must be seconded Debatable Amendable Majority vote required Speaker by...” Introduce business (a May not interrupt Majority vote “I move that...” Must be seconded Debatable Amendable primary motion) Speaker Required 1. These motions or points are listed in established order of precedence. When any one of them is pending, you may not introduce another that’s listed below it.
    [Show full text]
  • Legislative Process Lpbooklet 2016 15Th Edition.Qxp Booklet00-01 12Th Edition 11/18/16 3:00 PM Page 1
    LPBkltCvr_2016_15th edition-1.qxp_BkltCvr00-01 12th edition 11/18/16 2:49 PM Page 1 South Carolina’s Legislative Process LPBooklet_2016_15th edition.qxp_Booklet00-01 12th edition 11/18/16 3:00 PM Page 1 THE LEGISLATIVE PROCESS LPBooklet_2016_15th edition.qxp_Booklet00-01 12th edition 11/18/16 3:00 PM Page 2 October 2016 15th Edition LPBooklet_2016_15th edition.qxp_Booklet00-01 12th edition 11/18/16 3:00 PM Page 3 THE LEGISLATIVE PROCESS The contents of this pamphlet consist of South Carolina’s Legislative Process , pub - lished by Charles F. Reid, Clerk of the South Carolina House of Representatives. The material is reproduced with permission. LPBooklet_2016_15th edition.qxp_Booklet00-01 12th edition 11/18/16 3:00 PM Page 4 LPBooklet_2016_15th edition.qxp_Booklet00-01 12th edition 11/18/16 3:00 PM Page 5 South Carolina’s Legislative Process HISTORY o understand the legislative process, it is nec - Tessary to know a few facts about the lawmak - ing body. The South Carolina Legislature consists of two bodies—the Senate and the House of Rep - resentatives. There are 170 members—46 Sena - tors and 124 Representatives representing dis tricts based on population. When these two bodies are referred to collectively, the Senate and House are together called the General Assembly. To be eligible to be a Representative, a person must be at least 21 years old, and Senators must be at least 25 years old. Members of the House serve for two years; Senators serve for four years. The terms of office begin on the Monday following the General Election which is held in even num - bered years on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November.
    [Show full text]
  • December 7, 2016 the Honorable Paul Ryan Speaker, U.S. House H
    December 7, 2016 The Honorable Paul Ryan The Honorable Nancy Pelosi Speaker, U.S. House Democratic Leader, U.S. House H-232 Capitol Building H-204 Capitol Building Washington, DC 20515 Washington, DC 20515 Re: Consequences of Repealing ACA Provisions or Ending Cost-Sharing Reduction Reimbursements Dear Speaker Ryan and Leader Pelosi: With plans for repeal of all or part of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) reportedly being prioritized for action early in the 115th Congress, the American Academy of Actuaries’1 Health Practice Council urges you to consider the potential adverse consequences of repealing provisions of the ACA, such as the individual mandate and enrollee subsidies, without also enacting a replacement approach at the same time. Repealing major provisions of the ACA would raise immediate concerns that individual market enrollment would decline, causing the risk pools to deteriorate and premiums to become less affordable. Even if the effective date of a repeal is delayed, the threat of a deterioration of the risk pool could lead additional insurers to reconsider their participation in the individual market. Likewise, eliminating the reimbursements to insurers for cost-sharing reduction (CSR) subsidies could result in insurer losses and solvency challenges, leading insurers to further consider withdrawing from the market. In either case, significant market disruption could result, leading to millions of Americans losing their health insurance. Offering pre-existing condition protections requires incentives for enrollment A sustainable health insurance market depends on enrolling enough healthy people over which the costs of the less healthy people can be spread. To ensure viability when there is a guarantee that consumers with pre-existing conditions can obtain health insurance coverage at standard rates requires mechanisms to spread the cost of that guarantee over a broad population.
    [Show full text]
  • “The House Rules Committee” Prof
    “The House Rules Committee” Prof. Anthony Madonna POLS 4600 Maymester 5/20/2020 University of Georgia House Leaders and Committees: Outline 5/20/2020 Introduction Assorted House Floor a. Updates Issues b. Summary Section a. Rule Alternatives: c. Hastert Rule Suspension d. 2017 American Health Care Act b. Floor Consideration Data c. Committee of the Whole “Regular Order,” d. Points of Order Amendments and Leaders a. Rules Types over Time Part 2: Committee- b. Rules Committee and Marijuana Gatekeeper Games c. Overview of the Rules Committee Rule Types a. Open b. Modified-Open c. Closed d. Modified Closed e. Structured Rules Oddities a. Waiver Only b. Self-Executing c. Martial Law d. King of the Hill 2 e. More Votes POLS 4600: Updates (5/20) ASSIGNMENTS: Civil Rights Act of 1957 and Telecommunications Act of 1996 are the last two I’m working through. SUMMARY SECTION: Summary Section is DUE on Sunday, May 24th. If you turn it in early, great! I can get your grade back quicker and you can get started on the background section. Section is discussed in greater detail in the next slide. VIDEOS: Coming along slowly. Don’t hesitate to use selectively. EXAM: This Friday. Would you prefer to take the evening? Above: Another poor choice. Things it will cover: Cooper and Brady, House Rules Committee, Using Resources, Ideological Scaling, How a Bill Becomes a Law, Constitutional Foundations of Congress, Parties and Leaders. Pay particular attention to the Resources. EMAILS: Behind. But I’ll have them to you Summary Section SUMMARY SECTION: STRUCTURE Give a brief one-three paragraph overview of the measure.
    [Show full text]
  • March 2020 Public Minutes Redline (B2179258)
    ONECARE VERMONT ACCOUNTABLE CARE ORGANIZATION, LLC BOARD OF MANAGERS MEETING MAY 19, 2020 MINUTES A meeting of the Board of Managers of OneCare Vermont Accountable Care Organization, LLC (“OneCare”) was held remotely via video and phone conference on May 19, 2020. I. Call to Order John Brumsted, M.D., called the meeting to order at 4:32 p.m. II. Consent Agenda Items A motion to approve the consent agenda items was made by Todd Keating which was seconded Betsy Davis and approved by a supermajority vote. III. Governance Chair Brumsted stated that the Executive Committee put forth three nominees to the Patient Family Advisory Committee. Dr. Susan Shane, Medical Director, described the credentials of the nominees. A motion to approve the nominees was made by Betsy Davis which was seconded John Sayles and approved by a supermajority vote. Chair Brumsted noted that the Audit Committee charter has been put forth and that Dan Bennett has been nominated as chair of the committee. A motion to approve the charter and Mr. Bennet as chair was made by Todd Keating which was seconded Tom Dee and approved by a supermajority vote. IV. Network Telemedicine Dr. Shane, stated that due to the COVID-19 pandemic there has been an increase in the usage of telemedicine services. A telehealth survey was created and distributed to the network on May 18. To date there have been 250 responses. The results will be analyzed and then discussed at the June 1 Population Health Strategy Committee meeting. The analytics team is also reviewing usage of telemedicine services through claims data.
    [Show full text]