DOCSLIB.ORG

Ments; Amendments in Nature of Substitute

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Ments; Amendments in Nature of Substitute AMENDMENTS Ch. 27 § 25 amendment in the nature of a sub- tions proposing to strike out an stitute. entire pending portion (section or The Clerk read as follows: title) of text and to insert new Amendment in the nature of a matter and is not used to describe substitute offered by Mr. Wright: Strike out all after the enacting those motions to strike out and in- clause and insert in lieu thereof the sert which may be properly char- following: acterized as ‘‘perfecting amend- That the Intelligence Authoriza- ments’’ and which go only to a tion Act for Fiscal Year 1983 is amended by adding at the end there- portion of the pending text. of the following new title:... An amendment in the nature of MR. [HENRY J.] HYDE [of Illinois]: I a substitute for a bill may be pro- have an amendment that was printed posed before perfecting amend- in the Record. Will I be given an op- ments to the pending portion of portunity to offer it? the original text have been of- THE CHAIRMAN: (1) The Chair will ad- fered, but may not be voted on vise the gentleman that a printed per- until after such perfecting amend- fecting amendment to the bill can be (2) offered before the vote on the Wright ments have been disposed of. amendment in the nature of a sub- Amendments to a committee stitute. amendment in the nature of a Parliamentarian’s Note: In cases substitute are voted on before a such as that above, the perfecting substitute amendment, and the ef- amendment to the pending por- fect of the adoption of a substitute tion of the bill is voted on first. amendment striking out all after the title of the committee amend- ment is to eliminate the language § 25. Substitute Amend- inserted by the committee amend- ment as well as the language of ments; Amendments in the amendments thereto. (3) Nature of Substitute 2. See 107 CONG. REC. 8825–27, 87th An amendment in the nature of Cong. 1st Sess., May 24, 1961, where a substitute is basically, in form, a Member was recognized to offer an a motion to strike out and insert. amendment in the nature of a sub- stitute for a bill, and after it was But the term ‘‘amendment in the read another Member was recog- nature of a substitute’’ applies nized to offer a perfecting amend- only to those motions which pro- ment to the original text. The per- pose to strike out an entire pend- fecting amendment was considered ing bill, or, less precisely, to mo- and voted on before the amendment in the nature of a substitute. 1. William H. Natcher (Ky.). 3. See § 25.3, infra. 7099 Ch. 27 § 25 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS Where a substitute—striking is on the Smith substitute as amended, out all of the text and inserting to the Ramspeck amendment to the new matter—for an amendment Vinson bill? in the nature of a substitute is THE CHAIRMAN: (6) The gentleman is adopted, the vote recurs imme- correct. diately on the amendment, as MR. COCHRAN: Now I want to know amended, and no further amend- if the Smith substitute is adopted, if ments to either proposition are in the vote then comes on the Ramspeck order since the original amend- amendment as amended by the Smith ment has been changed in its en- substitute? tirety by the substitute. (4) THE CHAIRMAN: The gentleman is correct again.... MR. COCHRAN: I would like to make one further parliamentary inquiry. If Rejection of Substitute the Smith substitute is voted down, we then remain in Committee of the § 25.1 If a substitute amend- Whole and consider the Ramspeck bill, ment is adopted, the ques- open to amendment under the 5- tion recurs on the amend- minute rule? ment as amended by the sub- THE CHAIRMAN: The gentleman from Missouri is correct throughout. stitute; but if the substitute is rejected, the amendment is Adoption of Substitute for open to further amendment. Amendment in Nature of Sub- ( ) On Dec. 3, 1941, 5 the following stitute proceedings took place: MR. [JOHN J.] COCHRAN [of Mis- § 25.2 Where an amendment in souri]: I desire to know if the first vote the nature of a substitute to a bill is amended in Com- 4. See, for example, 116 CONG. REC. 20206, 91st Cong. 2d Sess., June 17, mittee of the Whole by the 1970 (response of Chairman Charles adoption of a substitute M. Price [Ill.] to parliamentary in- therefor, the question recurs quiry by Mr. James G. Fulton [Pa.]). on the amendment in the na- 5. 87 CONG. REC. 9395, 77th Cong. 1st ture of a substitute, as Sess. Under consideration was H.R. amended. 4139, to further expedite national ( ) defense programs with respect to On Dec. 16, 1970, 7 the fol- naval construction, etc., by providing lowing proceedings took place: for the investigation and mediation of labor disputes in connection there- 6. William P. Cole, Jr. (Md.). with. For discussion of the effect of 7. 116 CONG. REC. 42032, 91st Cong. 2d rejection of amendments generally, Sess. Under consideration was H.R. see §§ 35 and 38, infra. 18582. For discussion of the effect of 7100 AMENDMENTS Ch. 27 § 25 THE CHAIRMAN: (8) The question is on ture of a substitute) is to the substitute amendment offered by eliminate the language in- the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Abbitt), as amended for the amend- serted by the amendments to ment in the nature of a substitute, of- the amendment in the nature fered by the gentleman from Wash- of a substitute. ington (Mr. Foley). On May 26, 1960,(9) while a So the substitute for the amendment committee amendment in the na- in the nature of a substitute was agreed to. ture of a substitute was pending, THE CHAIRMAN: The question now the following proceedings took occurs on the amendment in the na- place: ture of a substitute offered by the gen- The Clerk read as follows: tleman from Washington (Mr. Foley), as amended by the substitute amend- Amendment offered by Mr. [Carl ment offered by the gentleman from A.] Elliott of Alabama: Page 13, strike out lines 5 through 12, and in- Virginia (Mr. Abbitt).... sert the following:... MR. [DURWARD G.] HALL [of Mis- souri]: The amendment was a sub- So the amendment was agreed (10) stitute amendment for the Foley com- to.... mittee amendment, and therefore the Amendment offered by Mr. [Adam question does not arise, does it? C.] Powell [Jr., of New York]: Page 18, line 4, after section 6(a) in- THE CHAIRMAN: The question is on sert:... the amendment in the nature of a sub- stitute offered by the gentleman from So the amendment was agreed Washington (Mr. Foley), as amended to....(11) by the substitute amendment offered Amendment offered by Mr. [Frank by the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. T.] Bow of Ohio: On page 11, line 20, Abbitt). after ‘‘Sec. 1.’’ strike out all after sec- tion 1 and insert in lieu thereof the § 25.3 Amendments to an following:... amendment in the nature of So the amendment was agreed a substitute are voted on be- to.... fore a substitute amendment, The committee amendment as (12) and the effect of the adop- amended was agreed to. tion of a substitute amend- 9. 106 CONG. REC. 11282, 11292, ment (here an amendment 11296–98, 11301, 11302, 86th Cong. striking out all after the title 2d Sess. Under consideration was of the amendment in the na- H.R. 10128. 10. 106 CONG. REC. 11282, 11292, 86th adoption of substitute amendments Cong. 2d Sess. generally, see § 32, infra. 11. Id. at pp. 11296, 11297. 8. Spark M. Matsunaga (Hawaii). 12. Id. at pp. 11298, 11301. 7101 Ch. 27 § 25 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS Since the rule permitted sepa- Chair responded to a parliamen- rate votes in the House on amend- tary inquiry as described above. ments to the committee amend- The proceedings were as follows: ment in the nature of a sub- THE CHAIRMAN: (17) The question is stitute, separate votes were de- on the amendment, as amended, of- manded on the three amend- fered as a substitute by the gentleman ments. An inquiry was then di- from Iowa (Mr. Smith) for the amend- rected to the Chair: (13) ment in the nature of a substitute of- fered by the gentleman from Texas MR. [GRAHAM A.] BARDEN [of North (Mr. Krueger). Carolina]: Mr. Speaker, what effect So the substitute amendment, as will the Bow amendment have on the amended, for the amendment in the other amendments that will be voted nature of a substitute to the committee on? amendment in the nature of a sub- THE SPEAKER: (14) If the Bow amend- stitute, was agreed to.... ment is agreed to it will strike out the THE CHAIRMAN: The question is on other two amendments. the amendment in the nature of a sub- MR. BARDEN: It strikes out the El- stitute offered by the gentleman from liott amendment and the Powell Texas (Mr. Krueger) as amended to the amendment? committee amendment in the nature of THE SPEAKER: That is correct. a substitute. MR. [ROBERT E.] BAUMAN [of Mary- § 25.4 Where a substitute for land]: Mr. Chairman, a parliamentary an amendment in the nature inquiry.... of a substitute has been . [I]t is my understanding that at this stage, since the Smith sub- agreed to, the question re- stitute amendment has been agreed to curs immediately upon the narrowly, that there are no further amendment as amended by amendments to the Krueger amend- the substitute, and further ment in the nature of a substitute perfecting amendments to since it was a complete substitute, is that correct? the amendment are not then THE CHAIRMAN: That is correct.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • In the Supreme Court of the United States
    No. 20-804 In the Supreme Court of the United States HOUSTON COMMUNITY COLLEGE SYSTEM, PETITIONER v. DAVID BUREN WILSON ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT BRIEF FOR THE UNITED STATES AS AMICUS CURIAE SUPPORTING PETITIONER ELIZABETH B. PRELOGAR Acting Solicitor General Counsel of Record BRIAN M. BOYNTON Acting Assistant Attorney General CURTIS E. GANNON Deputy Solicitor General SOPAN JOSHI Assistant to the Solicitor General MICHAEL S. RAAB LEIF OVERVOLD Attorneys Department of Justice Washington, D.C. 20530-0001 [email protected] (202) 514-2217 QUESTION PRESENTED Whether the First Amendment prohibits an elected body from adopting a censure resolution in response to a member’s speech. (I) TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Interest of the United States....................................................... 1 Statement ...................................................................................... 1 Summary of argument ................................................................. 6 Argument: A. The First Amendment did not abrogate the long- standing power of elected bodies to discipline their members, including by censure ...................................... 8 B. An elected body’s censure resolution against a member is governmental speech that does not infringe that member’s free-speech rights ................. 17 C. This Court need not address circumstances beyond the mere censure of a member of an elected body ..... 21 Conclusion ................................................................................... 25 TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Cases: Block v. Meese, 793 F.2d 1303 (D.C. Cir.), cert denied, 478 U.S. 1021 (1986) ...................................... 19 Bogan v. Scott-Harris, 523 U.S. 44 (1998) .......................... 16 Bond v. Floyd, 385 U.S. 116 (1966) ...................................... 20 Chapman, In re, 166 U.S. 661 (1897) ................................... 11 Garcetti v. Ceballos, 547 U.S. 410 (2006) ............................. 24 Gravel v.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction to the Rules of Town Meeting
    Introduction to the Rules of Town Meeting Southborough’s Town Meeting is an open town meeting in which all registered voters may participate. Town Meeting is a deliberative assembly, conducted via a defined process, charged with considering a maximum number of questions of varying complexity in a minimum amount of time and with full regard to the rights of the majority, strong minority, individuals, absentees and all of these together. In other words, we gather for the purpose of conducting the Town’s business thoughtfully and efficiently. AUTHORITY The three elements of authority at Town Meeting are a quorum of one hundred (100) registered voters or more, the Clerk and the Moderator. Of these three, the quorum is the most important. The Town Clerk is responsible for voter registration, certification of a quorum, setting up the hall and keeping the record of the proceedings. He may also officiate Town Meeting in the absence of a Moderator. The Moderator presides at and regulates the proceedings, decides all questions of order, and makes declarations of all votes. No one may speak on an issue without being recognized by the Moderator. It is the Moderator’s responsibility to approve the distribution of materials, and persons wishing to do so must seek his permission. The Moderator appoints Tellers and alternates for the purpose of counting votes of the meeting. THE WARRANT All matters to be considered at Town Meeting must be published in the Town Meeting Warrant, which is the responsibility of the Board of Selectmen. The primary and most important purpose of the Warrant is to notify voters in advance the nature of the business to be taken up at Town Meeting.
    [Show full text]
  • Censure of Board Members Policy Code: 2118
    Censure of Board Members Policy Code: 2118 It is the policy of the Board of Education that all Board members conduct themselves in a professional manner and in accordance with the Code of Ethics adopted by the Board. A "censure" under this policy is the process by which the Board of Education, acting by a two-thirds majority vote (i.e. five affirmative votes), can reprimand or condemn the actions of a member for any violation of law or policy or any other conduct committed by a Board member which tends to injure the good name of the Buncombe County Board of Education and/or undermines the effectiveness of the Buncombe County Schools or the Board of Education. A censure is an expression of formal disapproval by the Board. The Board, in addition to or in lieu of censure, may vote to 1) ask the member to resign or 2) refer possible misconduct by a Board member to the District Attorney as provided by law and/or 3) issue the Board member an official warning regarding future conduct. The Board of Education does not have the legal authority to remove a Board member from office. Therefore, any legal consequences or punitive sanctions related to a Board member’s actions shall be in accordance with applicable law and shall be separate and distinct from any censure proceeding under this Policy. In the event that a member of the Board of Education believes that a fellow Board member should be formally censured by the Board, the following protocol shall apply: 1) All Board proceedings related to a censure motion, with the exception of the disclosure of confidential information as permitted by the Open Meetings Law, shall be conducted in an open meeting.
    [Show full text]
  • Points of Order; Parliamentary Inquiries
    Points of Order; Parliamentary Inquiries A. POINTS OF ORDER § 1. In General; Form § 2. Role of the Chair § 3. Reserving Points of Order § 4. Time to Raise Points of Order § 5. Ð Against Bills and Resolutions § 6. Ð Against Amendments § 7. Application to Particular Questions; Grounds § 8. Relation to Other Business § 9. Debate on Points of Order; Burden of Proof § 10. Waiver of Points of Order § 11. Withdrawal of Points of Order § 12. Appeals B. PARLIAMENTARY INQUIRIES § 13. In General; Recognition § 14. Subjects of Inquiry § 15. Timeliness of Inquiry § 16. As Related to Other Business Research References 5 Hinds §§ 6863±6975 8 Cannon §§ 3427±3458 Manual §§ 627, 637, 861b, 865 A. Points of Order § 1. In General; Form Generally A point of order is in effect an objection that the pending matter or proceeding is in violation of a rule of the House. (Grounds for point of order, see § 7, infra.) Any Member (or any Delegate) may make a point of order. 6 Cannon § 240. Although there have been rare instances in which the Speaker has insisted that the point of order be reduced to writing (5 633 § 1 HOUSE PRACTICE Hinds § 6865), the customary practice is for the Member to rise and address the Chair: MEMBER: Mr. Speaker (or Mr. Chairman), I make a point of order against the [amendment, section, paragraph]. CHAIR: The Chair will hear the gentleman. It is appropriate for the Chair to determine whether the point of order is being raised under a particular rule of the House. The objecting Member should identify the particular rule that is the basis for his point of order.
    [Show full text]
  • Zoning Priorities: Amended Substitute Motion to CRC Motion 1.4.2021 CLEAN MOTION
    Zoning Priorities: Amended Substitute Motion to CRC Motion 1.4.2021 CLEAN MOTION: I move to amend the CRC motion on the table with a substitute motion that would change the wording in multiple paragraphs. Motions that would significantly amend the original motion are known as “substitute” amendments in Roberts Rules or Order (2nd edition, Chapter 5 C3: Substitute page 47). 3. Substitute Amendment: "The form for amending paragraphs that parallels striking out and inserting words has its own name: to substitute. A substitute replaces a paragraph or paragraphs in the immediately pending motion with one or more paragraphs given the amendment. A substitute may be offered for a paragraph or paragraphs, or any larger units: sections, articles .or even the entire main motion." P. 47 of the handbook The proposed Substitute amended motion would read as follows: The Substitute Motion as presented is as follows Motion: To direct the Town Manager to present zoning amendment- options to the Planning Board and Town Council Community Resources Committee, and ultimately the Town Council that promote diverse neighborhoods, affordable housing, and new growth in downtown and village centers, in accordance with Town Council Economic Vitality Performance Goal for the Town Manager (July 1,2020 to June 30, 2020), and where possible consider Climate Action, Housing Affordability, and Social Justice Goals. in the following time periods: Design guidelines: Throughout the coming year begin discussions and development of design guidelines that could be added to current
    [Show full text]
  • The Amending Process in the House of Representatives
    The Amending Process in the House of Representatives Christopher M. Davis Analyst on Congress and the Legislative Process Updated September 16, 2015 Congressional Research Service 7-5700 www.crs.gov 98-995 The Amending Process in the House of Representatives Summary Most amendments that Representatives propose to legislation on the House floor are offered in the Committee of the Whole. Measures considered under suspension of the rules are not subject to floor amendments, and few amendments are proposed to bills and resolutions considered in the House or in the House as in Committee of the Whole. The House’s procedures recognize distinctions between first- and second-degree amendments, between perfecting and substitute amendments, and among amendments in the forms of motions to strike, to insert, and to strike out and insert. An amendment in the nature of a substitute proposes to replace the entire text of a bill or resolution. All amendments must be germane to the text they would amend, and they are subject to other general prohibitions such as that against proposing only to re-amend language that has already been fully amended. Additional restrictions apply to appropriations and tax amendments, and the budget process creates various other points of order that Members may make against certain amendments. In general, a Member must make a point of order against an amendment before debate on it begins unless that point of order is waived by a special rule. Under an open amendment process in the Committee of the Whole, measures are usually considered for amendment one section or paragraph at a time.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 1 Adjournment
    Chapter 1 Adjournment A. GENERALLY; ADJOURNMENTS OF THREE DAYS OR LESS § 1. In General § 2. Adjournment Motions and Requests; Forms § 3. When in Order; Precedence and Privilege of Motion § 4. In Committee of the Whole § 5. Who May Offer Motion; Recognition § 6. Debate on Motion; Amendments § 7. Voting § 8. Quorum Requirements § 9. Dilatory Motions; Repetition of Motion B. ADJOURNMENTS FOR MORE THAN THREE DAYS § 10. In General; Resolutions § 11. Privilege of Resolution § 12. August Recess C. ADJOURNMENT SINE DIE § 13. In General; Resolutions § 14. Procedure at Adjournment; Motions Research References U.S. Const. art. I, § 5 5 Hinds §§ 5359–5388 8 Cannon §§ 2641–2648 Manual §§ 82–84, 911–913 1 VerDate 29-JUL-99 20:28 Mar 20, 2003 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 2574 Sfmt 2574 C:\PRACTICE\DOCS\MHP.001 PARL1 PsN: PARL1 §1 HOUSE PRACTICE A. Generally; Adjournments of Three Days or Less § 1. In General Types of Adjournments Adjournment procedures in the House are governed by the House rules and by the Constitution. There are: (1) adjournments of three days or less, which are taken pursuant to motion; (2) adjournments of more than three days, which require the consent of the Senate (§ 10, infra); and (3) adjourn- ments sine die, which end each session of a Congress and which require the consent of both Houses. Adjournments of more than three days or sine die are taken pursuant to concurrent resolutions. §§ 10, 13, infra. Adjournment Versus Recess Adjournment is to be distinguished from recess. The House may author- ize a recess under a motion provided in rule XVI clause 4.
    [Show full text]
  • How a Bill Becomes 4
    WELCOME TO THE WISCONSIN STATE ASSEMBLY ince becoming a state in 1848, Wisconsin has continued to demonstrate strong leadership and democracy. Because TABLE OF CONTENTS S 2 ...... Introduction of this proud history, our state has been looked to repeatedly as a national leader in government 4 ...... “The Law Needs to Change” innovation and reform. “How A Bill Becomes 4 ...... WisconsinEye Provides View of the Legislature Law” was created to help visitors understand 5 ...... Deliberation and Examination Wisconsin’s legislative process and provide 5 ...... Making a Good Idea Better suggestions on how citizens can participate in 6 ...... The Importance of Caucuses that process. This booklet explains how one idea 7 ...... First & Second Reading or inspiration becomes a bill and moves through 7 ...... Third Reading and Passage the legislative process and into the law books. 7 ...... On to the Senate It is a long road from initial development of an 8 ...... Assembly Bill 27 idea to the emergence of a new law. During 9 ...... Approval of the Governor and Into the Law Books consideration, the bill will be scrutinized and 9 ...... Conclusion examined, criticized and praised. It will be 10 .... Staying in Touch–How to Contact changed, improved, strengthened, and even Your State Representative weakened. If passed, it will undergo the ultimate 11 .... Find Information Online test of merit—time. 12 .... “How a Bill Becomes Law” Cartoon 13 .... “How a Bill Becomes Law” Flow Chart *Words in bold print are defined in the Glossary at the back of the booklet. 14 .... Glossary In this booklet, the bill used as an example of “How a Bill Becomes Law” is 2015 Assembly Bill 27.
    [Show full text]
  • The Constitutionality of Legislative Supermajority Requirements: a Defense
    The Constitutionality of Legislative Supermajority Requirements: A Defense John 0. McGinnist and Michael B. Rappaporttt INTRODUCTION On the first day of the 104th Congress, the House of Representatives adopted a rule that requires a three-fifths majority of those voting to pass an increase in income tax rates.' This three-fifths rule had been publicized during the 1994 congressional elections as part of the House Republicans' Contract with America. In a recent Open Letter to Congressman Gingrich, seventeen well-known law professors assert that the rule is unconstitutional.3 They argue that requiring a legislative supermajority to enact bills conflicts with the intent of the Framers. They also contend that the rule conflicts with the Constitution's text, because they believe that the Constitution's specific supermajority requirements, such as the requirement for approval of treaties, indicate that simple majority voting is required for the passage of ordinary legislation.4 t Professor of Law, Benjamin N. Cardozo Law School. tt Professor of Law, University of San Diego School of Law. The authors would like to thank Larry Alexander, Akhil Amar, Carl Auerbach, Jay Bybee, David Gray Carlson, Lawrence Cunningham, Neal Devins, John Harrison, Michael Herz, Arthur Jacobson, Gary Lawson, Nelson Lund, Erela Katz Rappaport, Paul Shupack, Stewart Sterk, Eugene Volokh, and Fred Zacharias for their comments and assistance. 1. See RULES OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, EFFECTIVE FOR ONE HUNDRED FOURTH CONGRESS (Jan. 4, 1995) [hereinafter RULES] (House Rule XXI(5)(c)); see also id. House Rule XXI(5)(d) (barring retroactive tax increases). 2. The rule publicized in the Contract with America was actually broader than the one the House enacted.
    [Show full text]
  • Unanimous-Consent Agreement
    October 14, 1988 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S 16269 I am proud to be a cosponsor of S. Mr. BYRD. It will be fine with me. 1851 and to have voted for it in the I ask unanimous consent that the ments be in order, with the exception of the Committee on the Judiciary. S. 1851 is committee-reported substitute amendment. motion to reconsider be vitiated. Ordered further. That time for debate on supported by the Department of Jus­ The PRESIDING OFFICER. With- any debatable motion, appeal, or point of tice, American Bar Association, Ameri­ out objection, it is so ordered. order, if submitted by the Chair, be limited can Jewish Committee, National Spir­ Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, I to 10 minutes each. itual Assembly of the Baha'is of the did not understand. Ordered further, That no motion to recom­ United States, Armenian Assembly of mit, with or without instructions, be in Mr. BYRD. I vitiated the motion to order. America, Amnesty International reconsider. Ordered further, That time for debate on U.S.A., and other organizations. Mr. THURMOND. I thank the Sena­ the bill be limited to11/2hours, to be equally Perhaps the most compelling words tor very much. divided and controlled between the Majority to demonstrate the importance of and Minority Leaders, or their designees. passing S. 1851 in this Congress were Ordered further,That the agreement be in those of Elie Weisel before the Judici­ UNANIMOUS-CONSENT AGREE- the usual form. (Oct. 14, 1988) ary Committee. He said, "What is at MENT—H.R. 3911, DEFENSE stake is the future of many nations.
    [Show full text]
  • The Legislative Process in Texas the Legislative Process in Texas
    The Legislative Process in Texas The Legislative Process in Texas Published by the Texas Legislative Council February 2021 Texas Legislative Council Lieutenant Governor Dan Patrick, Joint Chair Speaker Dade Phelan, Joint Chair Jeff Archer, Executive Director The mission of the Texas Legislative Council is to provide professional, nonpartisan service and support to the Texas Legislature and legislative agencies. In every area of responsibility, we strive for quality and efficiency. During previous legislative sessions, the information in this publication was published as part of the Guide to Texas Legislative Information. Copies of this publication have been distributed in compliance with the state depository law (Subchapter G, Chapter 441, Government Code) and are available for public use through the Texas State Publications Depository Program at the Texas State Library and other state depository libraries. This publication can be found at https://www.tlc.texas.gov/publications. Additional copies of this publication may be obtained from the council: By mail: P.O. Box 12128, Austin, TX 78711-2128 By phone: (512) 463-1144 By e-mail: [email protected] By online request form (legislative offices only): https://bilreq/House.aspx If you have questions or comments regarding this publication, please contact Kellie Smith by phone at (512) 463-1155 or by e-mail at [email protected]. Table of Contents HOW A BILL ORIGINATES. .1 INTRODUCING A BILL . 1 THE ROLE OF COMMITTEES. .2 REFERRAL TO A COMMITTEE. 2 COMMITTEE MEETINGS. 2 COMMITTEE REPORTS . .3 HOUSE CALENDARS AND LIST OF ITEMS ELIGIBLE FOR CONSIDERATION. 4 SENATE REGULAR ORDER OF BUSINESS AND INTENT CALENDAR.
    [Show full text]
  • The Amending Process in the House of Representatives
    The Amending Process in the House of Representatives Christopher M. Davis Analyst on Congress and the Legislative Process September 16, 2015 Congressional Research Service 7-5700 www.crs.gov 98-995 The Amending Process in the House of Representatives Summary Most amendments that Representatives propose to legislation on the House floor are offered in the Committee of the Whole. Measures considered under suspension of the rules are not subject to floor amendments, and few amendments are proposed to bills and resolutions considered in the House or in the House as in Committee of the Whole. The House’s procedures recognize distinctions between first- and second-degree amendments, between perfecting and substitute amendments, and among amendments in the forms of motions to strike, to insert, and to strike out and insert. An amendment in the nature of a substitute proposes to replace the entire text of a bill or resolution. All amendments must be germane to the text they would amend, and they are subject to other general prohibitions such as that against proposing only to re-amend language that has already been fully amended. Additional restrictions apply to appropriations and tax amendments, and the budget process creates various other points of order that Members may make against certain amendments. In general, a Member must make a point of order against an amendment before debate on it begins unless that point of order is waived by a special rule. Under an open amendment process in the Committee of the Whole, measures are usually considered for amendment one section or paragraph at a time.
    [Show full text]