§ 23. Executive Reorga- Nization Plans

POWERS AND PREROGATIVES OF THE HOUSE Ch. 13 § 23

which may constitutionally crease efficiency; group, coordi- be exercised by Congress, nate, and consolidate agencies; re- but also rulemaking and en- duce the number of agencies by forcement powers which consolidation; and eliminate over- have been delegated to other lapping and duplication of ef- branches of government. The fort.(6) These purposes could be Speaker and President pro achieved by transferring all or tempore may appoint mem- part of an agency or the function bers to commissions whose thereof to another agency; abol- authority is restricted to in- ishing all or part of the functions vestigation and information- of an agency; consolidating or co- gathering. Buckley v Valeo, ordinating the whole or part of an 424 U.S. 1 (1976). agency with another agency or the same agency; authorizing an offi- cer to delegate any of his func- § 23. Executive Reorga- tions; or abolishing the whole or nization Plans part of an agency which did not have or would not, as a con- The President was, prior to sequence of the reorganization, 1973, authorized to reorganize an have any functions.(7) Under this agency or agencies of the execu- statute a reorganization plan tive department if he submitted a could not create, abolish, or trans- plan to each House of Congress. A fer an executive department or provision contained in a reorga- consolidate two or more executive nization plan could take effect departments. only if the plan was transmitted A reorganization plan accom- before Apr. 1, 1973,(5) since the panied by a declaration that the authority of the President to reorganization was necessary to transmit reorganization plans had accomplish a recognized purpose not been extended beyond that must be delivered to both Houses date. A reorganization could be or- on the same day and to each dered to promote better execution House while in session.(8) A plan of laws; reduce expenditures; in- 6. 5 USC § 901. 5. 5 USC § 903, 5 USC § 905(b). Reorga- 7. 5 USC § 903. See also 5 USC § 904, nization authority was again ex- for other provisions of, and 5 USC tended, with certain procedural § 905, for limitations on, reorganiza- changes, in the 95th Congress. Pub. tion plans. L. No. 95–17. 8. 5 USC § 903(a), (b), 5 USC § 905(b).

1903 Ch. 13 § 23 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS submitted before Apr. 1, 1973, of the committee and procedure would become effective at the end for debate is clearly stated: of the first period of 60 calendar (a) When the committee has re- days of continuous congressional ported, or has been discharged from session after the transmittal date further consideration of, a resolution unless, during that period, either with respect to a reorganization plan, House passed a resolution stating it is at any time thereafter in order (even though a previous motion to the in substance that it did not favor same effect has been disagreed to) to ( ) the plan. 9 move to proceed to the consideration of As an exercise of the rule- the resolution. The motion is highly making power of the Senate and privileged and is not debatable. An House of Representatives and amendment to the motion is not in order, and it is not in order to move to with full recognition of the con- reconsider the vote by which the mo- stitutional right of either House to tion is agreed to or disagreed to. change its rules,(10) Congress pro- (b) Debate on the resolution shall be vided for the form of resolutions limited to not more than 10 hours, disapproving reorganization which shall be divided equally between plans,(11) reference of such resolu- those favoring and those opposing the resolution. A motion further to limit (12) tions to committees, discharge debate is not debatable. An amend- of committees considering such ment to, or motion to recommit, the resolution after 20 days,(13) as resolution is not in order, and it is not well as procedure after report or in order to move to reconsider the vote discharge of committee and debate by which the resolution is agreed to or disagreed to. on such resolutions.(14) The procedure after reporting or discharge Congress a]so provided that mo- tions to postpone relating to such 9. 5 USC § 906. The form of the resolu- resolutions, or to proceed to other tion is outlined in 5 USC § 909. business, should be decided with- Congress could accelerate the ef- out debate.(15) Appeals from deci- fective date; see §§ 23.33, 23.34, sions of the Chair applying House infra, for a discussion of House and Senate approval of a joint resolution or Senate rules to the consider- to accelerate a reorganization plan ation of resolutions disapproving establishing the Department of reorganization plans were also to Health, Education, and Welfare. be decided without debate.(16) 10. 5 USC § 908. Most of the precedents in this 11. 5 USC § 909. section discuss substantive as- 12. 5 USC § 910. 13. 5 USC § 911. 15. 5 USC § 913. 14. 5 USC § 912. 16. Id.

1904 POWERS AND PREROGATIVES OF THE HOUSE Ch. 13 § 23 pects of Presidential reorganiza- 1965,(9) 1969,(10) and 1971.(11) In tion plans.(17) Congress may also addition to the above legislation, reorganize executive agencies by title I of the War Powers Act of ( ) statute. 18 1941,(12) granted the President Statutes authorizing the Presi- emergency reorganization powers dent to promulgate reorganization to make such redistribution of (1) plans were approved in 1939, functions among executive agen- 1945,(2) 1949,(3) and 1966.(4) Amendments to the major reorga- cies as he deemed necessary dur- nization acts were approved in ing World War II. ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) 1953, 5 1957, 6 1961, 7 1964, 8

17. The exceptions are §§ 23.33–23.36, ACTION infra. See also Ch. 24, infra, for a discussion of certain procedural mat- ters relating to resolutions of dis- § 23.1 The House by yea and approval generally and House Rules nay vote rejected a resolu- and Manual § 1013 (1975) for a com- tion disapproving a Presi- pilation of statutory ‘‘legislative veto’’ provisions. § 23.1, infra, discusses dential reorganization plan the procedure for consideration of to consolidate a number of the Presidential reorganization plan volunteer programs into one which consolidated a number of pro- agency, ACTION. grams into one agency, ACTION. 18. See House Committee on Govern- On May 25, 1971,(13) the House ment Operations, Reorganization by under the procedures prescribed Plan and by Statute, 1946–1956 (May 1957) for examples of both by the Reorganization Act of 1966, kinds of reorganization. rejected by a vote of yeas 131, 1. 53 Stat. 561, 76th Cong. 1st Sess. nays 224, not voting 77, House (Pub. L. No. 76–19). Resolution 411, disapproving Re- 2. 59 Stat. 613, 79th Cong. 1st Sess. (Pub. L. No. 79–263). organization Plan No. 1 (consoli- 3. 63 Stat. 203, 81st Cong. 1st Sess. dating a number of volunteer pro- (Pub. L. No. 81–109). 4. 80 Stat. 378, 89th Cong. 2d Sess. 9. 79 Stat. 135, 89th Cong. 1st Sess. (Pub. L. No. 89–554). Note: Title 5 of (Pub. L. No. 89–43). the United States Code includes re- 10. 83 Stat. 6, 91st Cong. 1st Sess. (Pub. organization plans. L. No. 91–5). See also Pub. L. No. 5. 67 Stat. 4, 83d Cong. 1st Sess. (Pub. 95–17. L. No. 83–3). 11. 85 Stat. 574, 92d Cong. 1st Sess. 6. 71 Stat. 611, 85th Cong. 1st Sess. (Pub. L. No. 92–179). (Pub. L. No. 85–286). 7. 75 Stat. 41, 87th Cong. 1st Sess. 12. 55 Stat. 838, 77th Cong. 1st Sess. (Pub. L. No. 87–18). (Pub. L. No. 77–354). 8. 78 Stat. 240, 88th Cong. 2d Sess. 13. 117 CONG. REC. 16803, 16804, 16832 (Pub. L. No. 88–351). 16833, 92d Cong. 1st Sess.

1905 Ch. 13 § 23 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS grams into one agency, ACTION, The Clerk read the title of the reso- and transmitted by the President lution. on Mar. 24, 1971). By unanimous consent, the first reading of the resolution was dis- The Chairman of the Committee pensed with. on Government Operations, Chet THE CHAIRMAN: Under the unani- Holifield, of California, moved mous consent agreement, the gen- that the House resolve itself into tleman from California (Mr. Holifield) the Committee of the Whole for will be recognized for 11⁄2 hours, and consideration of the resolution dis- the gentleman from New York (Mr. approving the plan and pro- Horton) will be recognized for 11⁄2 ceedings ensued as indicated hours. below: The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California. MR. HOLIFIELD: Mr. Speaker, I move that the House resolve itself into the Mr. Holifield described the plan Committee of the Whole House on the in the Committee of the Whole: State of the Union for the consider- Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such ation of the resolution (H. Res. 411) time as I may consume. disapproving Reorganization Plan No. Mr. Chairman, House Resolution 411 1, transmitted to the Congress by the is a resolution to disapprove Reorga- President on March 24, 1971; and pending that motion, Mr. Speaker, I nization Plan No. 1 of 1971 submitted ask unanimous consent that debate on to the Congress by President Nixon on the resolution may continue not to ex- March 24. Both the plan and the reso- ceed 3 hours, the time to be equally di- lution were referred to the Committee vided and controlled by the gentleman on Government Operations under the from New York ( Mr. Horton) and my- rules of the House. The committee has self. . . . reported back the resolution with a THE SPEAKER: (14) Is there objection recommendation that it not be ap- to the request of the gentleman from proved. This is in effect an endorse- California? ment of the plan itself which we hope There was no objection. will be supported by the House. The THE SPEAKER: The question is on the vote, however, will be on the resolution motion offered by the gentleman from itself. Those who favor the plan should California. vote ‘‘no’’ on the resolution. Those who The motion was agreed to. oppose the plan should vote ‘‘aye’’ on Accordingly the House resolved itself the resolution. into the Committee of the Whole The President proposes in the reor- House on the State of the Union for ganization plan to create a new agency the consideration of House Resolution called Action to which would be trans- 411, with Mr. [John] Brademas [of In- ferred: diana] in the chair. First, Volunteers in Service to Amer- ica, now in the Office of Economic Op- 14. Carl Albert (Okla.). portunity;

1906 POWERS AND PREROGATIVES OF THE HOUSE Ch. 13 § 23

Second, auxiliary and special volun- Accordingly the Committee rose; and teer programs, now in the Office of the Speaker having resumed the chair, Economic Opportunity; Mr. Brademas, Chairman of the Com- Third, Foster Grandparents, now in mittee of the Whole House on the the Department of Health, Education, State of the Union, reported that that and Welfare; Committee having had under consider- Fourth, the retired senior volunteer ation House Resolution 411, to dis- program, now in the Department of approve Reorganization Plan No. 1 of Health, Education, and Welfare; and 1971, had directed him to report the Fifth, the Service Corps of Retired resolution back to the House with the Executives and Active Corps of Execu- recommendation that the resolution be tives, both now in the Small Business not agreed to. Administration. The Clerk reported the resolution; The President intends later to trans- MR. GERALD R. FORD [of Michigan]: fer the Peace Corps to the new agency Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary inquiry. by executive order and to similarly THE SPEAKER: The gentleman will transfer the Office of Volunteer Action. state his parliamentary inquiry. The President advised in his mes- MR. GERALD R. FORD: Mr. Speaker, sage that he also intends to submit for the information of the Members of legislation to Congress to transfer the the House, is it true that a vote ‘‘aye’’ Teacher Corps from HEW to Action. on the resolution is a vote against Re- Following this description and organization Plan No. 1, and that a debate the Clerk read the resolu- vote of ‘‘nay’’ is a vote to approve the President’s reorganization plan? tion; the Committee of the Whole agreed to rise with the rec- The inquiry having been an- ommendation that the resolution swered in the affirmative, the vote of disapproval not be agreed to: was taken:

THE CHAIRMAN: The Clerk will re- THE SPEAKER: The question is on the port the resolution. resolution. The Clerk read as follows: MR. HOLIFIELD: Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays. H. RES. 411 The yeas and nays were ordered. Resolved, That the House of Rep- The question was taken; and there resentatives does not favor the Reor- were—yeas 131, nays 224, not voting ganization Plan Numbered 1 trans- 77, as follows: . . . mitted to the Congress by the Presi- dent on March 24, 1971. So the resolution was rejected. MR. HOLIFIELD: Mr. Chairman, I § 23.2 The Senate by yea and move that the Committee do now rise nay vote rejected a resolu- and report the resolution back to the House with the recommendation that tion disapproving a Presi- the resolution be not agreed to. dential reorganization plan The motion was agreed to. to consolidate a number of 1907 Ch. 13 § 23 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

volunteer programs into one Bureau of Internal Revenue agency, ACTION. and Department of the Treas- On June 3, 1971,(15) the Senate ury by a vote of yeas 29, nays 54, rejected Senate Resolution 108, dis- § 23.4 The House by voice vote approving Reorganization Plan rejected a resolution dis- No. 1, consolidating a number of approving a Presidential re- volunteer programs into one agen- organization plan relating to cy, ACTION, submitted by the the Bureau of Internal Rev- President on Mar. 24,1971. enue and Department of the Treasury. Bureau of the Budget On Jan. 30, 1952,(18) the House § 23.3 The House by a yea and by voice vote rejected House Reso- nay vote rejected a resolu- lution 494 disapproving Reorga- tion disapproving a Presi- nization Plan No. 1, relating to dential reorganization plan the Bureau of Internal Revenue and Department of the Treasury relating to reorganization of (transmitted by the President on the Bureau of the Budget. Jan. 14, 1952), after the Com- On May 13, 1970,(16) the House mittee of the Whole approved a by a vote of yeas 164, nays 193, motion to rise and report the reso- not voting 73, rejected House Res- lution back to the House with the olution 960, disapproving Reorga- recommendation that it not be nization Plan No. 2, relating to agreed to. the Bureau of the Budget (transmitted by the President on Mar. Bureau of Narcotics 12, 1970), after the Committee of the Whole by voice vote approved § 23.5 The House by a yea and a motion that the Committee rise nay vote rejected a resolu- and report the resolution back to tion disapproving a Presi- the House with the recommenda- dential reorganization plan ( ) tion that it be agreed to. 17 relating to the creation of a new Bureau of Narcotics in 15. 117 CONG. REC. 17801–04, 92d Cong. 1st Sess. See also 117 CONG. REC. the Department of Justice. 17645–72, 92d Cong. 1st Sess., June On Apr. 2, 1968,(19) the House 2, 1971, for debate on this resolution. by a vote of yeas 190, nays 200, 16. 116 CONG. REC. 15297, 15298, 15331, 15332, 91st Cong. 2d Sess. 18. 98 CONG. REC. 642, 643, 671, 82d 17. The name of the Bureau of the Cong. 2d Sess. Budget has been changed to the Of- 19. 114 CONG. REC. 8601, 8628, 8629, fice of Management and Budget. 90th Cong. 2d Sess.

1908 POWERS AND PREROGATIVES OF THE HOUSE Ch. 13 § 23 present 2, and not voting 41, re- Community Relations Service jected House Resolution 1101 disapproving Reorganization Plan § 23.7 The House by yea and No. 1, creating a new Bureau of nay vote rejected a resolu- Narcotics in the Department of tion disapproving a Presi- Justice (transmitted by the Presi- dential reorganization plan dent on Feb. 7, 1968), after the relating to the transfer of the Community Relations Serv- Committee of the Whole by voice ice from the Department of vote approved a motion that the Commerce to the Depart- Committee rise and report the ment of Justice. resolution back to the House with ( ) the recommendation that it not be On Apr. 20, 1966, 1 the House agreed to. by a vote of yeas 163, nays 220, not voting 49, rejected House Res- Civil Aeronautics Board olution 756 disapproving Reorga- nization Plan No. 1, relating to § 23.6 The House by a yea and the transfer of the Community Re- nay vote rejected a resolu- lations Service from the Depart- tion disapproving a Presi- ment of Commerce to the Depart- dential reorganization plan ment of Justice (transmitted by relating to the Civil Aero- the President on Feb. 10, 1966), nautics Board. after the Committee of the Whole On June 20, 1961,(20) the House by voice vote approved a motion to by a vote of yeas 178, nays 213, rise and report the resolution to not voting 46, rejected House Res- the House with the recommenda- olution 304 disapproving Reorga- tion that it not be agreed to. nization Plan No. 3, relating to the Civil Aeronautics Board Departments of Agriculture (transmitted by the President on and Interior May 3, 1961), after the Committee § 23.8 The House agreed to a of the Whole approved a motion resolution disapproving a that the Committee rise and re- Presidential reorganization port the resolution back to the plan relating to the Depart- House with the recommendation ment of Agriculture and De- that it not be agreed to. partment of the Interior.

20. 107 CONG. REC. 10839–44, 87th 1. 112 CONG. REC. 8498–516, 89th Cong. 1st Sess. Cong. 2d Sess.

1909 Ch. 13 § 23 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

On July 7, 1959,(2) the House by Navy, and Air Force, transmitted a vote of yeas 266, nays 124, not by the President on May 16, 1956. voting 44, agreed to House Reso- lution 295, disapproving Reorga- Department of Commerce nization Plan No. 1, transferring from the Department of the Inte- § 23.10 The House by voice rior to the Department of Agri- vote rejected a resolution culture functions relating to min- disapproving a Presidential erals and forest lands. The plan reorganization plan relating had been transmitted by the to the Department of Com- President on May 22, 1959. This merce. House action followed approval by On May 18, 1950,(5) the House the Committee of the Whole of a by voice vote rejected House Reso- motion to report the resolution lution 546, disapproving Reorga- back to the House with the rec- nization Plan No. 5, transferring ( ) ommendation that it pass. 3 all functions of all other officers of the Department of Commerce to Departments of Army, Navy, the Secretary (with the exception and Air Force of hearings examiners employed § 23.9 The House as in Com- by the Department of Commerce, mittee of the Whole by voice Civil Aeronautics Board, Inland vote agreed to a resolution Waterways Corporation, and the disapproving a Presidential Advisory Board of the Inland Wa- reorganization plan relating terways Corporation), after the Committee of the Whole approved to the Departments of Army, a motion to rise and report the Navy, and Air Force. resolution back to the House with ( ) On July 5, 1956, 4 the House as the recommendation that it not be in Committee of the Whole agreed agreed to.(6) to House Resolution 534, disapproving Reorganization Plan Department of Labor No. 1, relating to new offices in the Departments of the Army, § 23.11 The House by voice vote rejected a resolution 2. 105 CONG. REC. 12856, 86th Cong. 1st Sess. 5. 96 CONG. REC. 7266–74, 81st Cong. 3. 105 CONG. REC. 12740–46, 86th 2d Sess. Cong. 1st Sess., July 6, 1959. 6. Reorganization Plan No. 5 was 4. 102 CONG. REC. 11886, 84th Cong. transmitted by the President on 2d Sess. Mar. 13, 1950.

1910 POWERS AND PREROGATIVES OF THE HOUSE Ch. 13 § 23

disapproving a Presidential the Committee rise and report the reorganization plan relating resolution back to the House with to the Department of Labor. the recommendation that it not be On Aug. 11, 1949,(7) the House agreed to. by voice vote rejected House Reso- Department of Urban Affairs lution 301, disapproving Reorga- and Housing nization Plan No. 2, transferring the Bureau of Employment Secu- § 23.13 The House by yea and rity, Veterans’ Placement Service nay vote agreed to a resolu- Board, and Federal Advisory tion disapproving a Presi- Council to the Department of dential reorganization plan Labor (transmitted by the Presi- relating to the Department of dent on June 20, 1949), after the Urban Affairs and Housing. Committee of the Whole by voice (9) vote approved a motion that the On Feb. 21, 1962, the House Committee rise and report back to by a vote of 264 yeas, 150 nays, 1 the House with a recommendation present, 20 not voting, agreed to that the resolution not pass. House Resolution 530, disapproving Reorganization Plan § 23.12 The House by voice No. 1, establishing a Department vote rejected a resolution of Urban Affairs and Housing disapproving a Presidential (transmitted by the President on reorganization plan relating Jan. 30, 1962). The Committee of to the Department of Labor. the Whole had recommended that the resolution not be agreed to.(10) On May 18, 1950,(8) the House by voice vote rejected House Reso- District of Columbia Govern- lution 522, disapproving Reorga- ment nization Plan No. 6, centralizing authority for all Department of § 23.14 The House by a yea and Labor functions in the Secretary nay vote rejected a resolu- of Labor (transmitted by the tion disapproving a Presi- President on Mar. 13, 1950) after dential reorganization plan the Committee of the Whole by voice vote approved a motion that 9. 108 CONG. REC. 2630–80, 87th Cong. 2d Sess. 7. 95 CONG. REC. 11296–314, 81st 10. The Department of Housing and Cong. 1st Sess. Urban Development was approved 8. 96 CONG. REC. 7241, 7266, 81st on Sept. 9, 1965, 79 Stat. 667 (Pub. Cong. 2nd Sess. L. No. 89–174).

1911 Ch. 13 § 23 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

relating to the District of Co- tion Plan No. 1, relating to the lumbia government. Executive Office of the President, (11) Federal Security Agency, Federal On Aug. 9, 1967, the House Works Agency, and Federal Loan by a vote of yeas 160, nays 244, Agency (transmitted by the Presi- not voting 28, rejected House Res- dent on Apr. 25, 1939), after the olution 512, disapproving Reorga- Committee of the Whole approved nization Plan No. 3, relating to a motion to rise and report the the Government, of the District of resolution back to the House with Columbia (transmitted by the the recommendation that it not be President on June 1, 1967), after agreed to. the Committee of the Whole by Environmental Protection voice vote approved a motion that Agency the Committee rise and report back to the House with the rec- § 23.16 The House by voice ommendation that the resolution vote rejected a resolution not be agreed to. disapproving a Presidential reorganization plan estab- Executive Office of the Presi- lishing the Environmental dent; Federal Agencies Protection Agency. § 23.15 The House by a yea and On Sept. 28, 1970,(13) the House nay vote rejected a concur- by voice vote rejected House Reso- rent resolution disapproving lution 1209, disapproving Reorga- nization Plan No. 3, establishing a Presidential reorganization the Environmental Protection plan relating to the Execu- Agency (transmitted by the Presi- tive Office of the President, dent on July 9, 1970), after the Federal Security Agency, Committee of the Whole by voice Federal Works Agency, and vote approved a motion to rise Federal Loan Agency. and report the resolution back to (12) the House with the recommenda- On May 3, 1939, the House tion that it be rejected. by a vote of yeas 128, nays 265, present 2, and not voting 35, re- Federal Communications Com- jected House Concurrent Resolu- mission tion 19, disapproving Reorganiza- § 23.17 The House by yea and 11. 113 CONG. REC. 21941–76, 90th nay vote agreed to a resolu- Cong. 1st Sess. 12. 84 CONG. REC. 5085, 5086, 76th 13. 116 CONG. REC. 33871–84,91st Cong. Cong. 1st Sess. 2d Sess.

1912 POWERS AND PREROGATIVES OF THE HOUSE Ch. 13 § 23

tion disapproving a Presi- McClellan, of Arkansas, made an dential reorganization plan announcement regarding Senate relating to the Federal Com- disposition of a Presidential reor- munications Commission. ganization plan. On June 15, 1961,(14) the House MR. MCCLELLAN: Mr. President, on by a vote of yeas 323, nays 77, not June 13, 1961, the Committee on Gov- ernment Operations, in executive ses- voting 36, agreed to House Reso- sion, ordered reported, without rec- lution 303 disapproving Reorga- ommendation, S. Res. 142, expressing nization Plan No. 2, relating to disapproval of Reorganization Plan No. the Federal Communications 2 of 1961. Commission (transmitted by the Under section 6 of the Reorganiza- President on Apr. 27, 1961), after tion Act of 1949, as amended, a reorganization plan may not become effective the Committee of the Whole ap- if a resolution of disapproval is adopt- proved a motion that the Com- ed by a simple majority of either mittee rise and report the resolu- House. On June 15, 1961, the House of tion back to the House with the Representatives adopted House Resolu- recommendation that it be agreed tion 303, to disapprove Reorganization Plan No. 2 of 1961.(17) Since this action (l5) to. results in the final disposition of the matter, it is no longer necessary either § 23.18 The House having for the Committee on Government Op- agreed to a resolution dis- erations to file a report on S. Res. 142, approving a Presidential re- or for the Senate to take any further organization plan relating to action. I call attention to the fact, however, the Federal Communications that hearings on that resolution have Commission, the Senate been held and will be available shortly Committee on Government for the information of Members of the Operations ordered reported, Senate. Legislation to enact certain provisions of Reorganization Plan No. without recommendation, a 2 is now pending before the Senate resolution to the same effect. Committee on Commerce—S. 2034— On June 16, 1961,(16) the Chair- and the House Committee on Inter- state and Foreign Commerce—H. R. man of the Senate Committee on 7333—and the House committee has Government Operations, John L. now completed hearings on H.R. 7333. I thought it proper to make this an- 14. 107 CONG. REC. 10448–62, 87th nouncement in view of the fact that Cong. 1st Sess. the committee had voted to report the 15. See § 23.18, infra, for Senate disposi- resolution as I have indicated. tion. 16. 107 CONG. REC. 10628, 87th Cong. 17. See § 23.17, supra, for House disposi- 1st Sess. tion.

1913 Ch. 13 § 23 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

Federal Home Loan Bank discharge the Committee on Board Government Operations from further consideration of a § 23.19 The House by voice resolution disapproving a re- vote rejected a motion to dis- organization plan relating to charge the Committee on federal maritime functions. Government Operations from ( ) further consideration of a On July 20, 1961, 20 the House resolution disapproving a re- by a vote of yeas 184, nays 208, organization plan, relating to not voting 35, rejected a motion to the Federal Home Loan Bank discharge the Committee on Gov- Board. ernment Operations from further consideration of House Resolution (18) On Aug. 3, 1961, the House 336, disapproving Reorganization by voice vote rejected a motion to discharge the Committee on Gov- Plan No. 7, relating to the Federal ernment Operations from further Maritime Administration, Federal consideration of House Resolution Maritime Board, and the Federal 335, disapproving Reorganization Maritime Commission (1) (trans- Plan No. 6, relating to the Federal mitted by the President on June Home Loan Bank Board (trans- 12, 1961). The motion was offered mitted by the President on June by Mr. H. R. Gross, of Iowa, who 12, 1961). The motion was offered qualified as favoring the resolu- by Mr. H. R. Gross, of Iowa, who tion of disapproval. qualified as being in favor of the ( ) resolution. 19 § 23.21 The Senate on a roll call vote rejected a resolu- Federal Maritime Functions tion disapproving a Presi- § 23.20 The House by yea and dential reorganization plan nay vote rejected a motion to relating to maritime functions. 18. 107 CONG. REC. 14548–54, 87th (2) Cong. 1st Sess. On Aug. 10, 1961, the Senate 19. See 63 Stat. 203, 207, 81st Cong. 1st by a vote of yeas 35, nays 60, re- Sess. (Pub. L. No. 81–109, § 204b), jected Senate Resolution 186, dis- for the requirement that the Member making the motion to discharge 20. 107 CONG. REC. 13084–97, 87th must qualify as favoring the resolu- Cong. 1st Sess. tion of disapproval. This provision 1. See § 23.21, infra, for Senate disposi- was later codified as 5 USC § 911(b) tion of this plan. (1970), 80 Stat. 397, Sept. 6, 1966 2. 107 CONG. REC. 15460, 15461, 87th (Pub. L. No. 89–554). Cong. 1st Sess.

1914 POWERS AND PREROGATIVES OF THE HOUSE Ch. 13 § 23 approving Reorganization Plan Security Agency, Social Secu- No. 7, relating to the Federal rity Board, and United States Maritime Administration, Federal Employment Service. Maritime Board, and Federal On June 10, 1947,(5) the House (3) Maritime Commission. by voice vote agreed to House Concurrent Resolution 49, dis- Federal Savings and Loan In- approving Reorganization Plan surance Corporation No. 2, relating to the Federal Se- § 23.22 The House as in Com- curity Agency, Social Security mittee of the Whole agreed to Board, and United States Employ- a resolution disapproving a ment Service (transmitted by the Presidential reorganization President on May 1, 1947), after plan creating the Federal the Committee of the Whole ap- Savings and Loan Insurance proved a motion to rise and report Corporation. back to the House with the recommendation that it be agreed to. On July 5, 1956,(4) the House as in Committee of the Whole by Federal Trade Commission voice vote agreed to House Resolu- tion 541, disapproving Reorga- § 23.24 The House by yea and nization Plan No. 2, creating the nay vote rejected a resolu- Federal Savings and Loan Insur- tion disapproving a Presi- ance Corporation (transmitted by dential reorganization plan the President on May 17, 1956). relating to the Federal Trade Commission. Federal Security Agency, So- (6) cial Security Board, and On June 20, 1961, the House United States Employment by a vote of yeas 178, nays 221, not voting 38, rejected House Res- Service olution 305, disapproving Reorga- § 23.23 The House by voice 5. 93 CONG. REC. 6722–40, 80th Cong. vote agreed to a concurrent 1st Sess. See appendix, infra, which resolution disapproving a indicates that concurrence of both Presidential reorganization Houses was required to disapprove plan relating to the Federal reorganization plans prior to June 20, 1949, the effective date of the rel- 3. See § 23.20, supra, for House disposi- evant provision of the Congressional tion of this resolution. Reorganization Act of 1949. 4. 102 CONG. REC. 11886, 84th Cong. 6. 107 CONG. REC. 10844–56, 87th 2d Sess. Cong. 1st Sess.

1915 Ch. 13 § 23 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS nization Plan No. 4, relating to National Labor Relations the Federal Trade Commission Board (transmitted by the President on May 9, 1961), after the Committee § 23.26 The House by a yea and of the Whole approved a motion nay vote agreed to a resolu- that the Committee rise and re- tion disapproving a Presi- port the resolution back to the dential reorganization plan House with the recommendation relating to the National that it not be agreed to. Labor Relations Board. On July 20, 1961,(8) the House Housing, Lending, and Insur- by vote of yeas 231, nays 179, ing Agencies present 2, not voting 25, agreed to House Resolution 328, dis- § 23.25 The House as in Com- approving Reorganization Plan mittee of the Whole by voice vote agreed to a concurrent No. 5, relating to the National resolution disapproving a Labor Relations Board (trans- Presidential reorganization mitted by the President on May plan relating to housing, 24, 1961), after the Committee of lending, and insuring agen- the Whole by voice vote approved cies. a motion that the Committee rise On June 18, 1947,(7) the House and report the resolution back to as in Committee of the Whole by the House with the recommenda- ( ) voice vote agreed to House Con- tion that it not be agreed to. 9 current Resolution 51, dis- § 23.27 The Senate indefinitely approving Reorganization Plan postponed further consider- No. 3, relating to housing, lend- ation of a resolution dis- ing, and insuring agencies, trans- approving a reorganization mitted by the President on May plan relating to the National 27, 1947. Labor Relations Board, after the House agreed to a resolu- 7. 93 CONG. REC. 7252, 80th Cong. 1st Sess. See appendix, infra, which in- tion of disapproval (thereby dicates that concurrence of both terminating the plan). Houses was required to disapprove reorganization plans prior to June 8. 107 CONG. REC. 13069–78, 87th 20, 1949, the effective date of the rel- Cong. 1st Sess. evant provision of the Congressional 9. See § 23.27, infra, for Senate disposi- Reorganization Act of 1949. tion.

1916 POWERS AND PREROGATIVES OF THE HOUSE Ch. 13 § 23

On July 20, 1961,(10) the Senate the House with the recommenda- indefinitely postponed Calendar tion that it be rejected. No. 545, Senate Resolution 158, disapproving Reorganization Plan Office of Science No. 5, relating to the National Labor Relations Board (trans- § 23.29 The House by voice mitted by the President on May vote rejected a resolution 24, 1961), after the House agreed disapproving a Presidential to disapprove the plan.(11) reorganization plan relating to the Office of Science after National Oceanic and Atmos- the Committee of the Whole pheric Administration adversely reported the meas- ure. § 23.28 The House by voice On May 16, 1962,(13) the House vote rejected a resolution by voice vote rejected House Reso- disapproving a Presidential lution 595, disapproving Reorga- reorganization plan creating nization Plan No. 2 of 1962 estab- the National Oceanic and At- lishing the Office of Science and mospheric Administration Technology in the Executive Office within the Department of of the President (transmitted by Commerce. the President on Mar. 29, 1962), On Sept. 28, 1970,(12) the House after the Committee of the Whole by voice vote rejected House Reso- by voice vote approved a motion to lution 1210 disapproving Reorga- rise and report the resolution nization Plan No. 4, creating the back to the House with the rec- National Oceanic and Atmos- ommendation that it not be pheric Administration within the agreed to. Department of Commerce (transmitted by the President on July 9, Reconstruction Finance Cor- 1970), after the Committee of the poration Whole by voice vote approved a § 23.30 The House by a yea and motion that the Committee rise nay vote rejected a resolu- and report the resolution back to tion disapproving a Presi- 10. 107 CONG. REC. 13027, 87th Cong. dential plan reorganizing the 1st Sess. Reconstruction Finance Cor- 11. See § 23.26, supra, for House disposi- poration. tion. 12. 116 CONG. REC. 33885–96, 91st 13. 108 CONG. REC. 8468–73, 87th Cong. Cong. 2d Sess. 2d Sess.

1917 Ch. 13 § 23 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

On Mar. 14, 1951,(14) the House olution 302, disapproving Reorga- by a vote of yeas 200, nays 198, nization Plan No. 1, relating to not voting 35,(15) failed to agree to the Securities and Exchange Com- House Resolution 142, dis- mission (transmitted by the Presi- approving Reorganization Plan dent on Apr. 27, 1961), after the No. 11, relating to the Reconstruc- Committee of the Whole approved tion Finance Corporation (trans- a motion to rise and report the mitted to the Congress on Feb. 19, resolution back to the House with 1951), after the Committee of the the recommendation that it not be Whole by voice vote approved a agreed to.(17) motion that the Committee rise and report the resolution back to § 23.32 The Senate by roll call the House with the recommenda- vote agreed to a resolution tion that it not be agreed to. disapproving a Presidential reorganization plan relating Securities and Exchange Com- to the Securities and Ex- mission change Commission. § 23.31 The House by yea and On June 21, 1961,(18) the Senate nay vote rejected a resolu- by a vote of yeas 52, nays 38, tion disapproving a Presi- agreed to Senate Resolution 148, dential reorganization plan disapproving Reorganization Plan relating to the Securities and No. 1, relating to the Securities Exchange Commission. and Exchange Commission (transmitted by the President on Apr. (16) On June 15, 1961, the House 27, 1961).(19) by a vote of yeas 176, nays 212, not voting 48, rejected House Res- Acceleration of Effective Date for Department of Health, 14. 97 CONG. REC. 2409–18, 82d Cong. 1st Sess. Education, and Welfare Reor- 15. Parliamentarian’s Note: Under 5 ganization Plan USC §§ 1332–1334 an affirmative vote of a majority of the authorized § 23.33 Instead of following the membership of the House was re- procedure prescribed by the quired to adopt a resolution disapproving a Presidential reorganiza- 17. See § 23.32, infra, for Senate disposition plan. This requirement was de- tion of this plan. leted on Sept. 4, 1957, by approval of 18. 107 CONG. REC. 11003, 87th Cong. 71 Stat. 611 (Pub. L. No. 85–286). 1st Sess. 16. 107 CONG. REC. 10463–71, 87th 19. See § 23.31, supra, for House disposi- Cong. 1st Sess. tion of this plan.

1918 POWERS AND PREROGATIVES OF THE HOUSE Ch. 13 § 23

Reorganization Act of 1949 to 12, 1953, shall take effect 10 days after vote on a resolution dis- the date of the enactment of this joint resolution and its approval by the approving a Presidential re- President, notwithstanding the provi- organization plan, the House sions of the Reorganization Act of 1949 approved a House joint reso- as amended, except that section 9 of lution effectuating a plan to such act shall apply to such reorga- create the Department of nization plan and to the reorganization made thereby. . . . Health, Education, and Wel- Amendment offered by Mr. [William fare 10 days after enactment C.] Lantaff [of Florida]: Page 1, line 4, of the joint resolution, rather after the numbers ‘‘1953’’ insert the than 60 days after submis- words ‘‘except the words in section 7 sion of the plan as provided thereof which read: ‘The Secretary may from time to time establish central ad- in the act. ministrative services in the field of On Mar. 13, 1953,(20) the House procurement, budgeting, accounting, agreed to House Joint Resolution personnel, library, legal, and services and activities common to the several 223, effectuating Presidential Re- agencies of the Department’.’’ . . . organization Plan No. 1, creating THE SPEAKER: (1) Under the rule the the Department of Health, Edu- previous question is ordered. cation, and Welfare from the Fed- The question is on the amendment. eral Security Agency, 10 days The amendment was agreed to. after enactment of the joint reso- THE SPEAKER: The question is on the lution. Approval of this joint reso- engrossment and third reading of the lution did not follow the proce- joint resolution. dures prescribed by the Reorga- The joint resolution was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, nization Plan of 1946, which pro- and was read the third time. vided that a Presidential reorga- THE SPEAKER: The question is on the nization plan would become effec- passage of the joint resolution. tive 60 days after its submission MR. [CHARLES A.] HALLECK [of Indi- to Congress unless either House ana]: Mr. Speaker, on that I demand agreed to a resolution dis- the yeas and nays. approving the plan. The following The yeas and nays were ordered. House joint resolution and amend- The question was taken; and there were—yeas 291, nays 86, answered ment were approved: ‘‘present’’ 3, not voting 51, as follows: Resolved, etc., That the provisions of So the House joint resolution was Reorganization Plan No. 1 of 1953, passed.(2) submitted to the Congress on March 1. Joseph W. Martin, Jr. (Mass.). 20. 99 CONG. REC. 2086–2113, 83d Cong. 2. The report on this joint resolution is 1st Sess. H. Rept. No. 166. See § 23.34, infra,

1919 Ch. 13 § 23 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

House Joint Resolution 223, joint resolution and amendments was considered under the fol- thereto to final passage without inter- lowing rule (H. Res. 179): (3) vening motion except one motion to recommit. Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to § 23.34 Instead of following the move that the House resolve itself into procedure prescribed in the the Committee of the Whole House on Reorganization Act of 1949, the State of the Union for the consideration of House Joint Resolution 223, to vote on a resolution dis- providing that Reorganization Plan approving a Presidential re- Numbered 1 of 1953 shall take effect organization plan, the Senate 10 days after the date of the enact- approved a House joint reso- ment of this joint resolution. After gen- lution effectuating a plan to eral debate, which shall be confined to the joint resolution, and shall continue create the Department of not to exceed 2 hours, to be equally di- Health, Education, and Wel- vided and controlled by the chairman fare 10 days after enactment and ranking minority member of the of the joint resolution rather Committee on Government Operations, than 60 days after submis- the joint resolution shall be read for amendment under the 5-minute rule. sion of the plan as provided At the conclusion of the consideration in the act. of the joint resolution for amendment, On Mar. 30, 1953,(4) the Senate the Committee shall rise and report the joint resolution to the House with agreed to House Joint Resolution ( ) such amendments as may have been 223, as amended by the House, 5 adopted, and the previous question creating the Department of shall be considered as ordered on the Health, Education, and Welfare from the Federal Security Agen- for Senate approval of this joint reso- (6) lution. cy. See Pub. Res. No. 75, 76th Cong. 3d Sess. (H.J. Res. 551) for a joint Postponing Vote resolution providing that Reorga- nization Plan No. 5, relating to the § 23.35 The House may post- Immigration and Naturalization pone voting on a resolution Service and the Department of Labor to disapprove a reorganiza- and transmitted by the President on May 22, 1940, should take effect on 4. 99 CONG. REC. 2448–59, 83d Cong. the 10th day after enactment of the 1st Sess. joint resolution. The joint resolution 5. See § 23.33, supra, for the text of the was approved on June 4, 1940. joint resolution and amendment. 3. 99 CONG. REC. 2086, 83d Cong. 1st 6. The report on this resolution is S. Sess. Rept. No. 126.

1920 POWERS AND PREROGATIVES OF THE HOUSE Ch. 13 § 23

tion plan by disagreeing to such a motion, but it has not been re- the highly privileged motion ported. that the House resolve itself MR. HALLECK: Mr. Speaker, a further parliamentary inquiry. into the Committee of the THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE: The Whole for consideration of gentleman will state it. such resolution. MR. HALLECK: The majority leader, On June 8, 1961,(7) the House the gentleman from Massachusetts postponed voting on a resolution [Mr. McCormack], talked to me yesterday about scheduling this matter for to disapprove a reorganization the consideration of the House of Rep- plan by disagreeing to the motion resentatives and indicated to me that that the House resolve itself into it would be scheduled in due time upon the Committee of the Whole for agreement between the majority and consideration of such resolution. the minority Members. In view of this I would like to inquire whether or not MR. [H.R.] GROSS [of Iowa]: Mr. we could have any assurance from the Speaker, is it in order and proper at leadership on the Democratic side, in- this time to submit a highly privileged cluding the acting majority leader and motion? the chairman of the Committee on THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE: (8) If the Government Operations, as to when matter to which the gentleman refers this matter might be called, if this mo- is highly privileged, it would be in tion now does not prevail. order. MR. [HALE] BOGGS [of Louisiana]: MR. GROSS: Then, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, in reply to the gen- under the provisions of section 205(a) tleman, in the absence of the majority Public Law 109, the Reorganization leader, I can only say that I can give Act of 1949, I submit a motion. . . . the assurance that the plan will be MR. [CHARLES A.] HALLECK [of Indi- called up. It is my understanding that ana]: Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary in- the chairman of the committee has inquiry. dicated that he will confer with the THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE: The majority leader on calling it up next gentleman will state it. Thursday. In the absence of the major- MR. HALLECK: As I understand, ity leader I cannot give a date positive, there is a motion pending to call up but I can give assurance that it will be what is known as Reorganization Plan called up.... No. 2. MR. HALLECK: Mr. Speaker, a fur- THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE: The ther parliamentary inquiry. chair would state that the gentleman THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE: The from Iowa indicated he would submit gentleman will state it. MR. HALLECK: If the pending motion 7. 107 CONG. REC. 9775–77, 87th Cong. is voted down, would it still be in order 1st Sess. at a subsequent date to call up a mo- 8. Oren Harris (Ark.). tion rejecting plan No. 2 for another

1921 Ch. 13 § 23 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

vote? I ask that because I am opposed THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE: The to plan No. 2. The committee has re- gentleman is correct.... ported adversely in respect to plan No. The Chair feels that this matter has 2. I am going to vote against that plan probably gone far enough. and in support of the resolution of the The Clerk will report the motion of- committee. But under my responsi- fered by the gentleman from Iowa. bility as the minority leader and under The Clerk read as follows: my agreement with the majority leader, I do not see how I could vote today Mr. Gross moves that the House resolve itself into the Committee of unless, under the situation as it exists, the Whole House on the State of the that vote today would be conclusive as Union for the consideration of H. to plan No. 2.... Res. 303 introduced by Mr. Monagan THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE: In the disapproving Reorganization Plan opinion of the Chair, under the Reorga- No. 2 transmitted to the Congress by the President on April 27, 1961. nization Act, it could be called up at a subsequent date. THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE: The MR. HALLECK: In other words, the question is on the motion. action that would be taken today MR. [CLARE E.] HOFFMAN of Michi- would not be final? gan: Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary in- THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE: The quiry. gentleman is correct.... THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE: The MR. [CLARENCE J.] BROWN [of Ohio]: gentleman will state it. Mr. Speaker, a further parliamentary MR. HOFFMAN of Michigan: Mr. inquiry. Speaker, if I vote to postpone this; am THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE: The I then on record as approving the gentleman will state it. plan? MR. BROWN: As I understand the THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE: Of parliamentary situation the motion course, that is not a parliamentary in- would be to take up the resolution of quiry. rejection; is that correct? MR. [BYRON G.] ROGERS of Colorado: THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE: The Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary inquiry. Chair would like to state that the mo- THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE: The tion has not yet been reported; but the gentleman will state it. Chair understands that the motion is MR. ROGERS of Colorado: Mr. Speak- for the House to go into Committee of er, is a motion to lay this motion on the Whole House for the consideration the table in order? of it. THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE: It MR. BROWN: If that should be de- would not be in order at this time. feated, of course, we would not have The question is on the motion offered the resolution of rejection before us. by the gentleman from Iowa [Mr. THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE: The Gross]. gentleman is correct. The motion was rejected.(9) MR. BROWN: And therefore the vote would be simply on whether we want 9. See § 23.17, supra, for a discussion of to take it up today or take it up later? the House vote on this plan to reor-

1922 POWERS AND PREROGATIVES OF THE HOUSE Ch. 13 § 23

Priority of Consideration is a highly privileged motion, to make the motion that the House proceed to § 23.36 The House having the consideration of House Resolution agreed that consideration of 516. the general appropriation The gentleman from Michigan being on his feet to present this highly privi- bill of 1951 take priority over leged motion, the regular order is that all business except con- he be recognized for that purpose that ference reports, it was held the motion be entertained and the that such agreement gave a question put before the House, and my higher privilege to the ap- motion is that the House proceed to propriation bill than consid- the consideration of House Resolution 516. eration of resolutions dis- THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE: That is approving reorganization the resolution disapproving one of the plans of the President. reorganization plans? On May 9, 1950,(10) Speaker pro MR. HOFFMAN of Michigan: That is tempore John W. McCormack, of right, House Resolution 516 disapproving plan No. 12.(11) Massachusetts, ruled that a unan- And, Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous imous-consent agreement that consent to revise and extend my re- consideration of the general ap- marks in connection with the point of propriation bill of 1951, a bill order.... combining all appropriations Mr. Speaker, may I be heard further measures, take priority of all busi- on the point of order? ness except conference reports, THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE: The gave a higher priority to the ap- Chair is glad to hear the gentleman propriation bill than consideration from Michigan. of resolutions disapproving Presi- MR. HOFFMAN: . . . [O]n the 3d of April the gentleman from Missouri dential reorganization plans. [Mr. Cannon] asked unanimous con- MR. [CLARE E.] HOFFMAN of Michi- sent ‘‘that time for general debate be gan: Mr. Speaker, I make the point of equally divided, one-half to be con- order that the House is not proceeding trolled by the gentleman from New in the regular order because under sec- York [Mr. Taber] and one-half by my- tion 205a of the Reorganization Act, self [Mr. Cannon]; that debate be con- which is Public Law 109 of the Eighty- fined to the bill and that following the first Congress, first session, any Mem- reading of the first chapter of the bill, ber of the House is privileged, and this not to exceed 2 hours of general debate be had before the reading of each sub- ganize the Federal Communications sequent chapter, one-half to be con- Commission. 10. 96 CONG. REC. 6720–24, 81st Cong. 11. This plan related to the National 2d Sess. Labor Relations Board.

1923 Ch. 13 § 23 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

trolled by the chairman and one-half Cannon] on either the 3d, the 5th, or by the ranking minority member of the the 6th of April, even though the cor- subcommittee in charge of the chap- rected request states ‘‘that the general ter.’’ appropriation bill shall be a special The gentleman from Texas [Mr. order privileged above all other business of the House under the rule until Mahon] cites page 4835 of the daily final disposition,’’ have priority over Record of April 5, which reads as fol- Public Law No. 109, Eighty-first Con- lows: gress, when, under title II, we find the Mr. Cannon. I ask unanimous con- following: sent that the general appropriation Sec. 201. The following sections of bill for the fiscal year 1951 have this title are enacted by the Con- right-of-way over all other privileged gress: business under the rules until dis- (a) As an exercise of the rule- position, with the exception of con- making power of the Senate and the ference reports. House of Representatives, respec- Still later and on April 6, the gen- tively, and as such they shall be considered as part of the rules of each tleman from Missouri [Mr. Cannon] House, respectively, but applicable asked unanimous consent that the only with respect to the procedure to Record be corrected. His request was be followed in such House in the as follows—pages 4976–4977 of the case of resolutions (as defined in sec- daily Record: tion 202); and such rules shall super- sede other rules only to the extent Mr. Cannon. Mr. Speaker, on page that they are inconsistent therewith; 4835 of the Record of yesterday, the and first column carrying the special (b) With full recognition of the con- order made by the House last night stitutional right of either House to reads that the general appropriation change such rules (so far as relating bill shall be a special order privi- to the procedure in such House) at leged above all other business of the any time, in the same manner and to House under the rule until disposi- the same extent as in the case of any tion. The order made was until final other rule of such House.... disposition. I ask unanimous consent Sec. 205. (a) When the committee that the Record and Journal be cor- has reported, or has been discharged rected to conform with the pro- from further consideration of, a reso- ceedings on the floor of the House lution with respect to a reorganiza- yesterday. tion plan, it shall at any time thereafter be in order (even though a pre- There was no objection.... vious motion to the same effect has Furthermore, while appropriation been disagreed to) to move to pro- bills have a privileged status, but ceed to the consideration of such res- under the subsequent rule of the olution. Such motion shall be highly House, adopted in the reorganization privileged and shall not be debat- bill, a motion to consider a resolution able. No amendment to such motion shall be in order and it shall not be is highly privileged. Certainly that has in order to move to reconsider the priority over this ordinary privilege or vote by which such motion is agreed special privilege which the gentleman to or disagreed to....(12) from Missouri [Mr. Cannon] secured. How can unanimous consent secured 12. Subsequent material—several Con- by the gentleman from Missouri [Mr. gressional Record excerpts from the

1924 POWERS AND PREROGATIVES OF THE HOUSE Ch. 13 § 23

THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE: The meet a particular situation or to carry Chair is prepared to rule. out its will. The gentleman from Michigan On April 5, the gentleman from Mis- makes a point of order, the substance souri [Mr. Cannon], chairman of the of which is that the motion he desires Committee on Appropriations, sub- to make or that someone else should mitted a unanimous-consent request to make in relation to the consideration the House, which was granted, which of a disapproving resolution of one of has the force of a rule, and which re- the reorganization plans takes prece- lates to the rules of the House gov- dence over the appropriation bill inso- erning the consideration of the omni- far as recognition by the Chair is con- bus appropriation bill while it is before cerned. The gentleman from Michigan the House and, of course, incidentally raises a very serious question and the affecting other legislation. The consent Chair feels at this particular time that request submitted by the gentleman it is well that he did so. from Missouri was ‘‘that the general The question involved is not a con- appropriation bill for the fiscal year stitutional question but one relating to 1951 have right-of-way over all other the rules of the House and to the Leg- privileged business under the rules islative Reorganization Act of 1949 until disposition, with the exception of which has been alluded to by the gen- conference reports.’’ tleman from Michigan and other Mem- That request was granted by unani- bers when addressing the Chair on mous consent. On the next day, the this point of order. The Chair calls at- gentleman from Missouri [Mr. Can- tention to the language of paragraph non], in correcting and interpreting the (b) of section 201 of title II of the Reor- consent request granted on April 5, ganization Act of 1949 which reads as submitted a further unanimous-con- follows: ‘‘with full recognition of the sent request. constitutional right of either House to The daily Record shows, on page change such rules so far as relating to 4976, April 6, that the gentleman from procedure in such House at any time Missouri [Mr. Cannon] said: in the same manner and to the same Mr. Speaker, on page 4835 of the extent as in the case of any other rule daily Record of yesterday, the first of such House.’’ column carrying the special order It is very plain from that language made by the House last night reads that the intent of Congress was to rec- that the general appropriation bill ognize the reservation to each House of shall be a special order privileged above all other business of the House certain inherent powers which are nec- under the rule until disposition. The essary for either House to function to order made was until final disposition. I ask unanimous consent that debate on reorganization plan provi- the Record and Journal be corrected sions of the Reorganization Act of to conform with the proceedings on the floor of the House yesterday. 1949, which indicate that the intent of the framers was to ensure a con- The Record further shows that the gressional veto power over such Speaker put the request and there was plans—is omitted here. no objection.

1925 Ch. 13 § 23 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

MR. [JOHN E.] RANKIN [of Mis- consider the appropriation bill, that sissippi]: Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary motion has preference over any other inquiry. preferential motion. It is a matter that THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE: Let the the House decides when the motion is Chair finish. made as to what it wants to do and it MR. RANKIN: Mr. Speaker, I would has an opportunity when that motion like to propound a parliamentary in- is made to carry out its will. quiry at this time. MR. [ARTHUR L.] MILLER of Ne- THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE: The braska: Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary Chair is in the process of making a rul- inquiry. ing. THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE: The MR. RANKIN: That is the reason I gentleman will state it. want to propound the inquiry right at MR. MILLER of Nebraska: I under- this point. stood the statement of the gentleman THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE: The from Missouri on April 6 was that the Chair recognizes the gentleman. appropriation bill would take prece- MR. RANKIN: We for the first time dence over all legislation and special this year have all the appropriations in orders until entirely disposed of. Does one bill. Now, if they drag out consid- that include conference reports? eration under the 5-minute rule be- THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE: A con- yond the 24th, would that not shut the ference report is in a privileged status Congress off entirely from voting on in any event. any of these recommendations? So we MR. [JOHN] TABER [of New York]: do have a constitutional right to con- They were specifically exempted. sider these propositions without having THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE: They them smothered in this way. were specifically exempted. In relation THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE: The to the observation made by the gen- Chair will state that the House always tleman from Michigan [Mr. Hoffman] has a constitutional right and power to that because other business has been refuse to go into the Committee of the brought up and that therefore con- Whole on any motion made by any stitutes a violation of the unanimous- Member, so that the House is capable consent request, the Chair, recognizing of carrying out its will whatever may the logic of the argument, disagrees be the will of the majority of the with it because that action was done House. through the sufferance of the Appro- Continuing, the Chair will state that priations Committee and, in the opin- in the opinion of the present occupant, ion of the Chair, does not constitute a in view of the unanimous-consent re- violation in any way; therefore does quest made by the gentleman from not obviate the meaning and effect of Missouri and granted by the House, if the unanimous-consent request here- any member of the Appropriations tofore entered into, and which the Committee moves that the House re- Chair has referred to. solve itself into the Committee of the For the reasons stated, the Chair Whole on the State of the Union to overrules the point of order.

1926 POWERS AND PREROGATIVES OF THE HOUSE Ch. 13 § 23

MR. HOFFMAN of Michigan: Mr. olution 546, that is, that the House Speaker, a further point of order. proceed to the consideration of each of THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE: The those resolutions in the order named, gentleman will state it. assuming, of course, that the ruling MR. HOFFMAN of Michigan: The will be the same, but making a record. point of order is the same as I raised before; but, to keep the Record clear, I THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE: The wish to make the same point of order Chair will reaffirm his ruling in rela- regarding House Resolution 522, tion to the several resolutions the gen- House Resolution 545, and House Res- tleman has referred to.

1927