§ 15. Effect of Ordering Previous Question

MOTIONS Ch. 23 §15

thereto, disagree to the Senate amend- § 15. Effect of Ordering ments, and agree to the conference asked by the Senate. Previous Question THE SPEAKER: (3) The gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Morgan) is Precluding Further Consider- recognized for 1 hour on his motion. ation Mr. Morgan: Mr. Speaker, I have no desire to use any time and there has § 15.1 Where the previous been no request for any time, and in question is moved on a reso- an effort to move the legislation along lution and the pending I will move the previous question. amendment thereto, no fur- However, a brief debate ensued, ther debate is in order unless after which the following occurred: the previous question is re-

MR. MORGAN: Mr. Speaker, I move jected. the previous question on the motion. On Sept. 17, 1965,(4) the House THE SPEAKER: The question is on or- was considering House Resolution dering the previous question.... 585, dismissing five Mississippi The question was taken; and there election contests. Mr. Carl Albert, were—yeas 247, nays 143, not voting of Oklahoma, had offered an 41.... amendment to the pending resolu- So the previous question was ordered.... tion. The following then occurred: MR. MORGAN: Mr. Speaker, notwith- MR. ALBERT: Mr. Speaker, I move standing the fact that the previous the previous question on the amend- question has been ordered on my mo- ment and the resolution. tion to go to conference, I ask unani- Mr. [JAMES G.] FULTON [of Pennsyl- mous consent that there now be 1 hour vania]: Mr. Speaker, I am on my feet. of debate, one-half to be controlled by I rise in opposition to the amendment. ( ) myself and one-half by the gentleman THE SPEAKER: 5 The gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Riegle) who has from Pennsylvania rises in opposition. announced that he will propose a mo- The Chair advises the gentleman that tion to instruct the conferees. under the rules he cannot be recognized unless time is yielded to him. THE SPEAKER: Is there objection to The gentleman from Oklahoma has the request of the gentleman from moved the previous question on the Pennsylvania? amendment and the resolution. MR. [DURWARD G.] HALL [of Mis- MR. FULTON of Pennsylvania: Mr. souri]: Mr. Speaker, I object. Speaker, a parliamentary inquiry. THE SPEAKER: The question is on the THE SPEAKER: The gentleman will motion offered by the gentleman from state it. Pennsylvania (Mr. Morgan). The motion was agreed to. 4. 111 CONG. REC. 24291, 89th Cong. 1st Sess. 3. John W. McCormack (Mass.). 5. John W. McCormack (Mass.).

4585 Ch. 23 §15 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

MR. FULTON of Pennsylvania: Will nearly $1,000,000,000 of appropria- this amendment foreclose the resolu- tions for functioning of the Social Secu- tion of Mr. Ryan being brought up by rity Administration, some portions of action of the House in the affirmative the Public Health Service and the on this resolution? United States Employment Service in THE SPEAKER: That is a matter for the Department of Labor. This is the the House to determine in carrying out question before the House. its will. Mr. Speaker, I move the previous The question is on the motion of the question. gentleman from Oklahoma ordering MR. [JOHN J.] ROONEY [of New the previous question on the amend- York]: Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary ment and the resolution. inquiry. The previous question was ordered. THE SPEAKER: The gentleman will THE SPEAKER: The question is on the state it. amendment. MR. ROONEY: Mr. Speaker, under the The amendment was agreed to. rules is not the majority granted the privilege of discussing this message? § 15.2 The demand for the pre- THE SPEAKER: If the gentleman from vious question precludes fur- Wisconsin withdraws his moving of the ther debate on the question previous question it would be in order. of passing a bill over a Presi- Otherwise it is not in order. dential veto. § 15.3 Demanding the previous On June 16, 1948,(6) the House question on a measure pre- was considering the veto of H.R. cludes further amendments 6355, providing supplemental ap- thereto. propriations for the Federal Secu- On June 12, 1961,(8) the House rity Agency for fiscal 1949. The was considering H.R. 7053, relat- following took place: ing to the admission of certain THE SPEAKER: (7) The unfinished evidence in the courts of the Dis- business is consideration of the Presi- trict of Columbia. The following dent’s veto of H.R. 6355. occurred: The question is, Will the House, on reconsideration, pass the bill, the ob- MR. [JOHN L.] MCMILLAN [of South jections of the President to the con- Carolina]: Mr. Speaker, I move the trary notwithstanding? previous question. MR. [FRANK B.] KEEFE [of Wis- MR. [WILLIAM C.] CRAMER [of Flor- consin]: Mr. Speaker, the President ve- ida]: Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman toed the bill H.R. 6355, which carries yield for the purpose of offering an amendment? 6. 94 CONG. REC. 8473, 80th Cong. 2d Sess. 8. 107 CONG. REC. 10080, 87th Cong. 7. Joseph W. Martin, Jr. (Mass.). 1st Sess.

4586 MOTIONS Ch. 23 §15

THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE: (9) Does MR. [DURWARD G.] HALL [of Mis- the gentleman from South Carolina souri]: Mr. Speaker, I move that that yield to the gentleman from Florida for motion be laid on the table; and I offer the purpose of offering an amendment? an amendment to the Journal. The (11) MR. MCMILLAN: Mr. Speaker, as I Speaker: The Chair will state that understand the parliamentary situa- the motion to lay on the table is in tion, I have moved the previous ques- order, but the amendment is not in tion.... order. What is the motion of the gentleman MR. CRAMER: Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary inquiry. from Missouri? MR. HALL: Mr. Speaker, a par- THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE: The liamentary inquiry. gentleman will state it. THE SPEAKER: The gentleman will MR. CRAMER: Mr. Speaker, I have state it. previously announced I would offer an MR. HALL: Mr. Speaker, during the amendment to make it applicable na- reading of the Journal, section by sec- tionwide in conformance with a bill re- tion, I asked at what time it might be ported by the Committee on the Judici- amended; and if I understood the dis- ary. Could the Chair advise me as to tinguished Speaker correctly he said when and if such an amendment is in that if such an amendment were sub- order and under what circumstances? mitted by the gentleman from Missouri THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE: The or any other person at any time it Chair will state that the amendment would be in order at the end of the can be offered only if the previous reading of the Journal. question is voted down. THE SPEAKER: The gentleman from MR. CRAMER: I thank the Chair. Missouri has a correct recollection of what the Chair said at that time. How- § 15.4 The motion to amend ever, the gentleman from Oklahoma the Journal may not be ad- [Mr. Albert] has made a motion that mitted after the previous the Journal as read be approved and upon that he has moved the previous question is demanded on the question. motion to approve. On Sept. 13, 1965,(10) after the § 15.5 After the previous ques- Clerk concluded reading the Jour- tion is moved, an amendment nal the following occurred: may be offered to a pending resolution only if the pre- MR. [CARL] ALBERT [of Oklahoma]: vious question is voted down. Mr. Speaker, I move that the Journal ( ) be approved as read; and on that I On Mar. 9, 1967, 12 the House move the previous question. was considering House Resolution

9. W. Homer Thornberry (Tex.). 11. John W. McCormack (Mass.). 10. 111 CONG. REC. 23600, 23601, 89th 12. 113 CONG. REC. 6035–42, 6048, Cong. 1st Sess. 6049, 90th Cong. 1st Sess.

4587 Ch. 23 §15 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

376, providing special counsel for § 15.6 The stage of disagree- the House, the Speaker, and other ment having been reached Members named in the action and the previous question brought by Adam Clayton Powell, having been demanded on Jr., former Representative from the motion to recede [the mo- the State of New York. After de- tion to recede and concur in bating the resolution for one hour, the Senate amendment hav- Mr. Hale Boggs, of Louisiana, the ing been divided], the Chair proponent of the resolution, informed a Member seeking moved the previous question recognition to offer ‘‘a sub- thereon. Mr. Joe D. Waggonner, stitute’’ motion that the pre- Jr., of Louisiana, rose with a parliamentary inquiry. vious question had been demanded. MR. WAGGONNER: Mr. Speaker, is (15) the House of Representatives consid- On May 14, 1963, the House ering this resolution as a privileged was considering H.R. 5517, pro- resolution? viding supplemental appropria- THE SPEAKER: (13) This concerns the tions for fiscal 1963. The following privileges of the House. occurred: R AGGONNER M . W : Will there be op- Mr. [ALBERT] THOMAS [of Texas]: Mr. portunity to amend this resolution if Speaker, perhaps I used the wrong ter- the previous question is not voted minology a little while ago. I am going down? to move the previous question and THE SPEAKER: That depends on the then the vote, as I understand it, will action taken by the House in connec- come on the motion to recede and we tion with the previous question. should recede and I hope the member- ship will vote ‘‘aye.’’ When we do that, MR. [BYRON G.] ROGERS of Colorado: then I will offer a motion to concur Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary inquiry. with an amendment. THE SPEAKER: The gentleman will Mr. Speaker, I move the previous state his parliamentary inquiry. question. MR. ROGERS of Colorado: If we vote MR. [H. R.] GROSS [of Iowa]: Mr. down the previous question, then we Speaker, I would like to offer a sub- have the resolution before us and we stitute for the Barry motion. can then amend it; can we not? THE SPEAKER: (16) The gentleman THE SPEAKER: The resolution will be from Texas has moved the previous before the House for such action as the question. House desires to take.(14) § 15.7 The ordering of the pre- 13. John W. McCormack [Mass.]. vious question prevents fur- 14. See also 111 CONG. REC. 19, 20, 89th Cong. 1st Sess., Jan. 4, 1965; and 15. 109 CONG. REC. 8508, 88th Cong. 1st 107 CONG. REC. 10080, 87th Cong. Sess. 1st Sess., June 12, 1961. 16. John W. McCormack (Mass.).

4588 MOTIONS Ch. 23 §15

ther debate and the offering THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE: The of amendments. gentleman might have opposed the previous question. On May 31, 1932,(17) the House was considering House Resolution Effect on Amendments Between 235, authorizing an investigation the Houses of government competition with private enterprise. The following § 15.8 After the previous ques- occurred: tion has been ordered on a motion to recede and concur, MR. [EDWARD W.] POU [of North Carolina]: Mr. Speaker, I move the no further debate is in order previous question. on that motion. The previous question was ordered. On Aug. 26, 1960,(19) the House THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE: (18) The had agreed to the conference re- question is on the passage of the reso- port on H.R. 12619, providing ap- lution. propriations for the mutual secu- MR. [BURTON L.] FRENCH [of Idaho]: Mr. Speaker, I offer an amendment rity program for fiscal 1961, and which I send to the desk. had begun considering amend- THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE: The ments in disagreement when the previous question has been ordered. following took place: The previous question having been or- MR. [OTTO E.] PASSMAN [of Lou- dered, no amendment is in order at isiana]: Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion. this time. The Clerk read as follows: MR. FRENCH: Mr. Speaker, let me make inquiry. I understand that all de- Mr. Passman moves that the bate is cut off on the resolution, but a House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of the Senate Member has the privilege of offering numbered 3 and concur therein with an amendment. an amendment, as follows: In lieu of THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE: Under the matter proposed by said amend- the rules of the House, not only is de- ment, insert ‘‘, including not less bate cut off but all power to offer than $35,000,000 for Spain.’’ amendments is cut off by the ordering MR. [SILVIO O.] CONTE [of Massachu- of the previous question. setts]: Mr. Speaker—— MR. FRENCH: The Speaker is quite THE SPEAKER: (20) For what purpose right. I have confused the motion for does the gentleman rise? the previous question with the common MR. CONTE: To object to the amend- motion to close debate. I desired to ment. offer an amendment which would limit MR. PASSMAN: Mr. Speaker, I move the expenditure. the previous question on the motion.

17. 75 CONG. REC. 11681, 72d Cong. 1st 19. 106 CONG. REC. 17869, 17870, 86th Sess. Cong. 2d Sess. 18. Loring M. Black [N.Y.]. 20. Sam Rayburn (Tex.).

4589 Ch. 23 §15 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

THE SPEAKER: Without objection, the move that the vote by which House previous question is ordered. Resolution 506 was adopted be now re- There was no objection. considered. MR. CONTE: Mr. Speaker, a par- MR. [CARL] ALBERT [of Oklahoma]: liamentary inquiry. Mr. Speaker, I move that the motion THE SPEAKER: The gentleman just be laid upon the table. asked for a vote on it. MR. MCCULLOCH: Mr. Speaker, I ask for the yeas and nays. MR. CONTE: Can we debate it? THE SPEAKER: The question is on the THE SPEAKER: Not after the previous motion offered by the gentleman from question is ordered.(1) Oklahoma [Mr. Albert]. MR. [MELVIN R.] LAIRD [OF WIS- Effect on Motion to Reconsider CONSIN]: Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary inquiry. § 15.9 Where a resolution (pro- THE SPEAKER: The Chair is in the viding for the order of busi- process of counting. ness) had been agreed to Evidently a sufficient number have without debate and without risen, and the yeas and nays are ordered. the ordering of the previous MR. LAIRD: Mr. Speaker, a par- question, a motion to recon- liamentary inquiry. sider the vote thereon was THE SPEAKER: The gentleman will ruled debatable. state his parliamentary inquiry. MR. LAIRD: Mr. Speaker, on the reso- (2) On Sept. 13, 1965, the House lution just passed no one was allowed had voted to adopt House Resolu- to debate that resolution on behalf of tion 506, providing for consider- the minority or the majority. If this ation of H.R. 10065, the Equal motion to table, offered by the gen- Employment Opportunity Act of tleman from Oklahoma [Mr. Albert] is defeated, then there will be time to de- 1965. Mr. William M. McCulloch, bate the resolution just passed. of Ohio, rose to his feet. The question of reconsideration is debatable, and it can be debated on the MR. MCCULLOCH: Mr. Speaker, was merits of the legislation which has not the previous question ordered on the been debated by the House. question to adopt the resolution that has just been voted on? THE SPEAKER: What part of the gentleman’s statement does he make as a (3) THE SPEAKER: It was not. parliamentary inquiry? MR. MCCULLOCH: Mr. Speaker, hav- MR. LAIRD: Mr. Speaker, if the mo- ing voted in the affirmative, I now tion to debate is defeated, the motion to reconsider will give us an oppor- 1. See also 104 CONG. REC. 19618, 85th tunity to debate the question on the Cong. 2d Sess., Aug. 23, 1958. resolution. 2. 111 CONG. REC. 23608, 89th Cong. THE SPEAKER: Under the present cir- 1st Sess. cumstances, the motion to reconsider 3. John W. McCormack (Mass.). would be debatable.

4590 MOTIONS Ch. 23 §15

Debate on Amendment to Reso- offer the amendment. The Clerk will lution report the amendment.... THE SPEAKER: The gentleman from § 15.10 Where a member of the Georgia [Mr. Cox] moves the previous question on the amendment and the Committee on Rules calling resolution. up a resolution reported by MR. MAY: Mr. Speaker, a parliamen- that committee offers an tary inquiry. amendment to such a resolu- THE SPEAKER: The gentleman will tion, the amendment is not state it. debatable if the previous MR. MAY: Mr. Speaker, I desire to inquire whether or not the amendment question has been moved and as offered is debatable before the pre- ordered. vious question is voted upon. On Mar. 11, 1941,(4) Mr. Ed- THE SPEAKER: The previous question ward E. Cox, of Georgia, called up has been moved. If the previous ques- House Resolution 120, providing tion is voted down, the amendment would be subject to debate. The ques- for investigation of national de- tion is on ordering the previous ques- fense. After the Clerk read the tion. resolution, the following took place: § 15.11 Where the House had

MR. COX: Mr. Speaker, I have stated ordered the previous ques- that the language proposed by the gen- tion on an amendment in the tleman from New York [Mr. Wads- nature of a substitute for a worth] is an improvement to this bill, resolution and on the resolu- and I offer it as an amendment to the bill, and, Mr. Speaker, I move the pre- tion, the Speaker indicated vious question on the amendment and that no further amendment the resolution. to the resolution would be in MR. [ANDREW J.] MAY [of Kentucky]: order. Mr. Speaker, I make the point of order ( ) that the resolution is not subject to On June 13, 1973, 6 the House amendment until the previous question was considering House Resolution has been disposed of. 437, providing for consideration of THE SPEAKER: (5) After the previous H.R. 8410, which would permit a question is ordered amendments are temporary increase in the public not in order. MR. MAY: Certainly not. debt limitation. Mr. John B. An- THE SPEAKER: It is in order for the derson, of Illinois, offered an gentleman from Georgia [Mr. Cox] to amendment in the nature of a substitute to the pending resolu- 4. 87 CONG. REC. 2189, 77th Cong. 1st Sess. 6. 119 CONG. REC. 19343, 19344, 93d 5. Sam Rayburn (Tex.). Cong. 1st Sess.

4591 Ch. 23 §15 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS tion. After the amendment had ment and the resolution to been read and debated for one which it is offered, following hour the following occurred: acceptance or rejection of

MR. [JOHN] ANDERSON [of Illi- the amendment, the vote re- nois]:... Mr. Speaker, I move the curs immediately on the res- previous question of the amendment olution. and on the resolution.... (9) The vote was taken by electronic de- On Mar. 1, 1967, the House vice, and there were—yeas 254, nays was considering House Resolution 160, not voting 19.... 278, relating to the right of Rep- So the previous question was or- resentative-elect Adam C. Powell, dered.... Jr., of New York, to be sworn in. THE SPEAKER:(7) The question is on Mr. Thomas B. Curtis, of Mis- the amendment in the nature of a sub- souri, offered an amendment to stitute offered by the gentleman from the resolution and the previous Illinois (Mr. Anderson). . . . question was ordered on both the The vote was taken by electronic de- vice, and there were—yeas 248, nays amendment and the resolution. 163, not voting 22. . . . After a brief discussion, Mr. So the amendment in the nature of a Charles E. Goodell, of New York, substitute was agreed to. . rose with a parliamentary inquiry: MR. [ROBERT L.] LEGGETT [of Cali- MR. GOODELL: Mr. Speaker, if the fornia]: Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary Curtis amendment which is now pend- inquiry. ing is defeated, then is it in order to THE SPEAKER: The gentleman will move the previous question on the state it. committee resolution? MR. LEGGETT: We have now had one THE SPEAKER: (10) If the amendment amendment to the rule. I am won- is defeated, the original resolution will dering at this point would another be before the House for a vote. amendment for tax reform, as sug- MR. GOODELL: For an immediate gested by Mr. Reuss, be in order? vote? THE SPEAKER: The answer is ‘‘no’’, THE SPEAKER: Yes, for an immediate because the previous question has been vote. (8) ordered on the resolution. MR. GERALD R. FORD [of Michigan]: Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary inquiry. § 5.12 When the previous ques- THE SPEAKER: The gentleman will tion is ordered on an amend- state it. MR. GERALD R. FORD: If the amend- 7. Carl Albert (Okla.). ment of the gentleman from Missouri 8. See also 113 CONG. REC. 5036, 90th Cong. 1st Sess., Mar. 1, 1967; and 9. 113 CONG. REC. 5036, 5037, 90th 113 CONG. REC. 28, 31–33, 90th Cong. 1st Sess. Cong. 1st Sess., Jan. 10, 1967. 10. John W. McCormack (Mass.).

4592 MOTIONS Ch. 23 §15

prevails as a substitute for the com- was not permitted to be made in the mittee resolution, then there will be an Committee of the Whole. The pref- opportunity for a further vote, how- erential motion is to strike the enact- ever? ing clause. Is it in order in the House THE SPEAKER: Then the question will at this time? occur on the adoption of the resolution, THE SPEAKER: Due to the fact that as amended. the previous question has been ordered on the bill to final passage, the motion is not in order at this time. Effect on Motion to Strike En- acting Clause Effect When Ordered on Reso- lution and Pending Amend- § 15.13 A motion in the House ment to strike out the enacting clause is not in order where § 15.14 A special rule reported the previous question has by the Committee on Rules is been ordered on the bill and subject to amendment unless amendments thereto to final the previous question is or- passage. dered. ( ) On Apr. 16, 1970, 11 the House On Apr. 15, 1936,(13) the House was considering H.R. 16311, the was considering House Resolution Family Assistance Act of 1970. 475 providing for the consider- The following occurred: ation of S.J. Res. 234, to create a ( ) special committee to investigate THE SPEAKER: 12 Under the rule, the previous question is ordered. lobbying activities. Mr. John J. The question is on the engrossment O’Connor, of New York, offered an and third reading of the bill. amendment to the resolution, [The bill was ordered to be engrossed which was read by the Clerk. Mr. and read a third time, and was read Bertrand H. Snell, of New York, the third time.] asked Mr. O’Connor to yield, and THE SPEAKER: The question is on the the following occurred: passage of the bill. How can the gentleman present an MR. [OMAR T.] BURLESON [of Texas]: amendment now if it is not a com- Mr. Speaker a parliamentary inquiry. mittee amendment? HE PEAKER T S : The gentleman will MR. O’CONNOR: I am presenting it on state his parliamentary inquiry. my own responsibility, the gentleman MR. BURLESON of Texas: Mr. Speak- from Georgia [Mr. Cox], in charge of er, I have a preferential motion which the rule, having yielded to me for that purpose. 11. 116 CONG. REC. 12092, 91st Cong. 2d Sess. 13. 80 CONG. REC. 5535, 5536, 74th 12. John W. McCormack (Mass.). Cong. 2d Sess.

4593 Ch. 23 §15 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

MR. SNELL: Then the rule is open for at that time, but the previous question amendment. which has been ordered prevents that MR. O’CONNOR: The gentleman from now. Georgia yielded to me for this purpose, MR. SNELL: I know that when a rule to offer an amendment. is opened up for amendment anybody MR. [EDWARD E.] COX [of Georgia]: else can offer an amendment. Mr. Speaker, I move the previous ques- THE SPEAKER: The gentleman’s tion. amendment would have been in order The previous question was ordered. if the previous question had not been MR. [BYRON B.] HARLAN [of Ohio]: A ordered, provided the amendment were parliamentary inquiry. Mr. Speaker. germane. THE SPEAKER: (14) The gentleman will state it. Effect When ‘‘Considered as MR. HARLAN: Is the previous ques- Ordered’’ Pursuant to Special tion ordered on the amendment or on Rule the resolution? THE SPEAKER: On both. § 15.15 Where the House has MR. SNELL: How can the previous agreed by unanimous con- question apply to both? sent to a request that debate THE SPEAKER: That was the motion shall be limited in time and of the gentleman from Georgia.... confined to a resolution dis- MR. SNELL: Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary inquiry. posing of an election contest, THE SPEAKER: The gentleman will and that the previous ques- state it. tion shall be considered as MR. SNELL: Mr. Speaker, I have al- ordered at the conclusion of ways understood that when a rule is such debate, a substitute presented on the floor and the Member in charge of the rule opens it up for amendment is not in order. amendment, that it is then open to On Aug. 19, 1937,(15) the House amendment on the part of anyone who was considering House Resolution desires to offer an amendment. 309, dealing with the election con- THE SPEAKER: That is true, until the test of Roy v Jenks. The following previous question has been ordered, and the previous question has here occurred: been ordered. THE SPEAKER: (16) The gentleman MR. SNELL: It has now, but when I from North Carolina modifies his re- originally asked the question it had not quest and now asks unanimous con- been ordered. I wanted to offer an sent that debate on the pending resolu- amendment. tion shall be confined to the resolution, THE SPEAKER: The Chair would have been glad to recognize the gentleman 15. 81 CONG. REC. 9356, 9374, 75th Cong. 1st Sess. 14. Joseph W. Burns (Tenn.). 16. William B. Bankhead (Ala.).

4594 MOTIONS Ch. 23 §15

shall continue for 2 hours and 30 min- The question is on the amendment. utes, one-half to be controlled by him- MR. [ABRAHAM J.] MULTER [of New self and one-half by the gentleman York]: Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary from Massachusetts; that at the con- inquiry. clusion of this time the previous ques- THE SPEAKER: The gentleman will tion shall be considered as ordered. state his parliamentary inquiry. Is there objection? MR. MULTER: I am about to ask for MR. [CHARLES L.] Gifford [of Massa- the yeas and nays on the Multer chusetts]: Mr. Speaker, reserving the amendment, as amended by the Sisk right to object, may I be allowed to file amendment. If that amendment is re- a substitute motion during that period? jected on the rollcall vote, which I will MR. [JOHN H.] KERR [of North Caro- ask for, will the pending business be- lina]: I do not agree to that. fore the House then be H.R. 4644? THE SPEAKER: Is there objection to THE SPEAKER: As introduced. the request of the gentleman from MR. MULTER: Mr. Speaker, on the North Carolina? amendment I demand the yeas and There was no objection. nays. MR. GERALD R. FORD [of Michigan]: Bills Reported From the Com- Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary inquiry. mittee of the Whole THE SPEAKER: The gentleman will state it. § 15.16 Where the Committee MR. GERALD R. FORD: If the Multer of the Whole reports a bill to amendment as amended is defeated, the House pursuant to a res- we then go back to H.R. 4644. Is there olution which specifies that an opportunity after that to amend or to further consider? the ‘‘previous question shall THE SPEAKER: The response to that be considered as ordered on would be in the negative, because the the bill, etc.’’ the bill is not previous question has been ordered. open to further amendment in the House. § 15.17 Unless the previous question is ordered on an On Sept. 29, 1965,(17) the Com- mittee of the Whole was consid- amendment reported from ering H.R. 4644, providing home the Committee of the Whole rule for the District of Columbia. such amendment is subject After the bill was reported back to to further consideration and the House the following occurred: debate in the House. (19) THE SPEAKER: (18) Under the rule, the On Dec. 10, 1937, the Com- previous question is ordered. mittee of the Whole having had under consideration the bill, H.R. 17. 111 CONG. REC. 25438, 25439, 89th Cong. 1st Sess. 19. 82 CONG. REC. 1285, 1286, 75th 18. John W. McCormack (Mass.). Cong. 2d Sess.

4595 Ch. 23 §15 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

8505, the farm bill, reported that recognition to debate the amendment bill back to the House with cer- the Chair would recognize that right. tain amendments. The following Unanimous Consent to Offer then occurred: Amendment MR. [MARVIN] JONES [of Texas]: Mr. Speaker, I move the previous question § 15.18 When the Chairman of on all amendments except the Boileau the Committee of the Whole amendment. reports a bill back to the The previous question on all amend- House pursuant to a resolu- ments except the Boileau amendment was ordered.... tion providing that the pre- MR. [GERALD J.] BOILEAU [of Wis- vious question shall be con- consin]: Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary sidered as ordered, further inquiry. The Speaker: (20) The gen- debate or amendments in the tleman will state it. House are thereby pre- MR. BOILEAU: Mr. Speaker, the gen- cluded; and the Speaker has tleman from Texas [Mr. Jones] has declined to entertain unani- moved the previous question on all amendments except the Boileau mous-consent requests that amendment. I do not recall a similar further amendments be in situation since I have been a Member order.(1) of the House, and I frankly confess I do On Aug. 31, 1960,(2) the Com- not know the effect of the motion of the mittee of the Whole rose to report gentleman from Texas. I would appre- ciate it if the Speaker would explain to a price support bill to the House: the Members of the House the present THE CHAIRMAN: (3) There being no status of the Boileau amendment. amendments, under the rule the Com- Am I correct in my understanding of mittee rises. the present situation that because of Accordingly the Committee rose; and the previous question having been or- the Speaker having resumed the chair, dered on all amendments other than Mr. Keogh, Chairman of the Com- mittee of the Whole House on the the Boileau amendment there is no State of the Union, reported that that longer opportunity for debate on such Committee having had under consider- amendments, but that, the previous ation the bill (S. 2917) to establish a question not having been ordered on price support level for milk and but- the Boileau amendment, there is op- terfat, pursuant to House Resolution portunity for debate on it unless the 636, he reported the bill back to the previous question is ordered? House. THE SPEAKER: Unless the previous question is ordered on the Boileau 1. But see § 14.13, supra. amendment, if a Member should seek 2. 106 CONG. REC. 18748, 86th Cong. 2d Sess. 20. William B. Bankhead (Ala.). 3. Eugene J. Keogh (N.Y.).

4596 MOTIONS Ch. 23 §15

THE SPEAKER: (4) Under the rule the ering H.R. 8505, the farm bill. previous question is ordered. After the Committee rose and re- The question is on the third reading ported back to the full House the of the Senate bill. The bill was read a third time. following occurred: MR. [CARL H.] ANDERSEN [of Min- MR. [MARVIN] JONES [of Texas]: Mr. nesota]: Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary Speaker, I move the previous question inquiry. on all amendments except the Boileau THE SPEAKER: The gentleman will amendment. state it. The previous question on all amend- MR. ANDERSEN of Minnesota: Would ments except the Boileau amendment it be possible by unanimous consent to was ordered.... return to the amendment stage? THE SPEAKER: (6) Is a separate vote THE SPEAKER: It would not. The pre- demanded on any amendment? vious question has already been or- MR. [GERALD J.] BOILEAU [of Wis- dered. All amendments and all debate consin]: Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary are exhausted. inquiry. The question is on the passage of the THE SPEAKER: The gentleman will bill. state it. The question was taken; and on a di- MR. BOILEAU: Will there be an op- vision (demanded by Mr. Fulton) there portunity for a separate vote on the were yeas 171, noes 32. Boileau amendment? So the bill was passed, and a motion MR. JONES: I may say to the gen- to reconsider was laid on the table. tleman I am about to ask for a separate vote on it. Effect Where Several Amend- MR. BOILEAU: I confess I am not fa- ments Are Pending miliar with the procedure in the situation now before the House as to the ef- § 15.19 Where the previous fect of ordering the previous question question is ordered on some on all amendments except the Boileau amendment. of the amendments reported THE SPEAKER: The previous question from the Committee of the has already been ordered by the Whole, they must be disposed House, thus bringing to an immediate of before further consider- vote all amendments except the so- ation of the remaining called Boileau amendment. . . . amendments may be had. MR. BOILEAU: Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary inquiry. (5) On Dec. 10, 1937, the Com- THE SPEAKER: The gentleman will mittee of the Whole was consid- state it.... MR. BOILEAU: If a motion for the 4. Sam Rayburn (Tex.). previous question were made and the 5. 82 CONG. REC. 1285, 1286, 75th Cong. 2d Sess. 6. William B. Bankhead (Ala.).

4597 Ch. 23 §15 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

previous question ordered on the MR. [JACK] NICHOLS [of Oklahoma]: Boileau amendment, would that Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary inquiry. amendment then be in the same posi- THE SPEAKER: The gentleman will tion before this body as the other state it. amendments? MR. NICHOLS: Mr. Speaker, would a THE SPEAKER: It would, except the motion be in order at this time that previous question has already been or- the House resolve itself into the Com- dered on the other amendments, and mittee of the Whole House on the state under the present situation the amend- of the Union for the further consider- ments upon which the previous ques- ation of the bill H.R. 3408? tion is ordered will be put to a vote THE SPEAKER: The Chair replies in and disposed of before the Boileau the negative to that parliamentary in- amendment is before the House for quiry. consideration. Effect on Point of Order Effect on Motions to Resolve Against Amendment Into Committee of the Whole § 15.21 After the previous § 15.20 After the previous question has been ordered in question is ordered on a bill the House, it is too late to to final passage, it is not in interpose a point of order order to move that the House against an amendment re- resolve itself into the Com- ported from the Committee mittee of the Whole for the of the Whole. further consideration of such On July 21, 1956,(9) the Com- bill. mittee of the Whole reported back On July 8, 1937,(7) the Com- to the House the bill H.R. 7992, to mittee of the Whole reported back enact certain provisions included to the House H.R. 3408 with an in the Department of Defense Ap- amendment to amend the Civil propriations Act and the Civil Service Act. The following oc- Functions Appropriations Act. curred: THE SPEAKER: (10) Under the rule, the THE SPEAKER: (8) Under the rule the previous question is ordered. previous question is ordered on the bill MR. [FRANK T.] BOW [of Ohio]: Mr. and amendment to final passage.... Speaker, a parliamentary inquiry. The question is on the engrossment THE SPEAKER: The gentleman will and third reading of the bill. state it.

7. 81 CONG. REC. 6944, 6951, 6952, 9. 102 CONG. REC. 13857, 84th Cong. 75th Cong. 1st Sess. 2d Sess. 8. William B. Bankhead (Ala.). 10. Sam Rayburn (Tex.).

4598 MOTIONS Ch. 23 §15

MR. BOW: The Committee has adopt- MR. HOFFMAN of Michigan: Is a mo- ed an amendment which changes the tion to recommit in order at this time? rules of the House. My parliamentary THE SPEAKER: Not until after the inquiry is this: Is it proper at this time third reading of the bill. to again interpose a point of order MR. [JOHN E.] RANKIN [of Mis- against the report of the Committee on sissippi]: Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary the ground that the rules have been inquiry. changed in the Committee of the THE SPEAKER: The gentleman will Whole? state it. THE SPEAKER: The Committee of the Whole has reported an amendment. MR. RANKIN: Mr. Speaker, that The Chair would be forced to hold that means the House will have to stay in the point of order comes too late and session until the engrossed copy is se- will not lie at this time. cured? THE SPEAKER: It does not. Effect on Bill Considered on MR. RANKIN: We cannot take a re- Calendar Wednesday cess on Calendar Wednesday? THE SPEAKER: The House can ad- § 15.22 A bill considered under journ. MR. RANKIN: We can adjourn but the Calendar Wednesday rule that ends Calendar Wednesday. becomes unfinished business THE SPEAKER: The previous question if the House adjourns after has been ordered and the next time ordering the previous ques- the House meets, whether this week or tion thereon. any other week, it is the pending business.... (11) On Feb. 22, 1950, the House The Chair wants all Members to un- was considering H.R. 4453, the derstand that on the convening of the Federal Employment Practice Act. House at its next session, the final dis- The bill was ordered to be en- position of this matter is the pending grossed and read a third time, business. after which the following occurred: Effect on Motion to Recommit MR. [ANDREW J.] BIEMILLER [of Wis- consin]: Mr. Speaker, I demand a read- § 15.23 The Member offering a ing of the engrossed copy of the motion to recommit a bill bill.... with instructions may, at the MR. [CLARE E.] HOFFMAN of Michi- gan: Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary in- conclusion of the 10 minutes quiry. of debate thereon, yield to THE SPEAKER: (12) The gentleman will another Member to offer an state it. amendment to the motion if

11. 96 CONG. REC. 2254, 81st Cong. 2d the previous question has Sess. not been ordered on the mo- 12. Sam Rayburn (Tex.). tion to recommit. 4599 Ch. 23 §15 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

On July 19, 1973,(13) the House THE SPEAKER: The gentleman will was considering House Resolution state it. MR. HAYS: Mr. Speaker, my point of 8860, to amend and extend the order is that I do not believe the gen- Agriculture Act of 1970. Mr. tleman from California can yield for Charles M. Teague, of California, this purpose without getting unani- offered a motion to recommit and mous consent. THE SPEAKER: The gentleman can controlled the floor for five min- yield for the purpose of an amendment, utes of debate in favor of his mo- since he has the floor. tion. Mr. William R. Poage, of MR. TEAGUE of California: Mr. Speaker, I yield to the distinguished Texas, then controlled the floor for minority leader for the purpose of of- five minutes in opposition to the fering an amendment. motion to recommit. Mr. Gerald R. MR. GERALD R. FORD: Mr. Speaker, I Ford, of Michigan, sought to have offer an amendment to the motion to recommit. Mr. Poage yield the floor to him MR. [JOHN E.] MOSS [of California]: for the purpose of offering an Mr. Speaker, a point of order. amendment to the motion to re- THE SPEAKER: The gentleman will commit. The following occurred: state it. MR. MOSS: Mr. Speaker, my point of MR. POAGE: Certainly I will yield, order is that the time of the gentleman but I would like to hear the amend- from California had expired. ment. THE SPEAKER: That does not keep him from yielding. THE SPEAKER: (14) The gentleman is not in order. The gentleman from Cali- MR. MOSS: He has not got the floor. THE SPEAKER: The gentleman from fornia (Mr. Teague) has control of the California has the right to yield for an motion to recommit and can yield for amendment, since he still has the floor that purpose if he desires to do so. as the previous question has not been The gentleman from Texas now has ordered on the motion to recommit. the floor. MR. POAGE: Mr. Speaker, I will not Ordered Prior to Motion to Re- yield for a pig in a poke. I want to commit Conference Report know what the gentleman is proposing. THE SPEAKER: The gentleman cannot § 15.24 A motion to recommit a yield for that purpose. The gentleman conference report is not in from California can yield for that pur- order until the previous pose.... The time of the gentleman from Texas has expired. question has been ordered MR. [WAYNE L.] HAYS [of Ohio]: Mr. on the conference report. Speaker, a point of order. On Dec. 15, 1970,(15) the House was considering the conference re- 13. 119 CONG. REC. 24967, 93d Cong. 1st Sess. 15. 116 CONG. REC. 41502, 41503, 91st 14. Carl Albert (Okla.). Cong. 2d Sess.

4600 MOTIONS Ch. 23 § 16 port on H.R. 17755, appropria- Carl Albert, of Oklahoma, author- tions for the Department of Trans- izing the Speaker to administer portation for fiscal 1971. Mr. Sid- the oath of office to Mr. Richard ney R. Yates, of Illinois, rose with L. Ottinger, of New York. The fol- a parliamentary inquiry: lowing occurred:

MR. YATES: Mr. Speaker, a par- MR.[JAMES C.] CLEVELAND [of New liamentary inquiry. Hampshire]: Mr. Speaker, will the gen- THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE: (16) The tleman yield for a parliamentary in- gentleman will state his parliamentary quiry? inquiry. MR. ALBERT: I yield for a parliamen- MR. YATES: Mr. Speaker, as I under- tary inquiry. stand, in order to have specific instruc- MR. CLEVELAND: If this resolution is tions given to the conferees it is nec- adopted, will it be impossible for me to essary that the previous question be offer my own resolution pertaining to voted down; is that correct? I mean on the same subject mattter, either as an the motion to recommit? amendment or a substitute? THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE: The THE SPEAKER: (18) If the resolution is Chair will state that the gentleman agreed to, it will not be in order for the from Illinois is in error. The previous gentleman to offer a substitute resolu- question on the conference report has tion or an amendment, particularly if to be ordered before there can be a mo- the previous question is ordered. tion to recommit. MR. CLEVELAND: Is it now in order, Mr. Speaker? THE SPEAKER: Not unless the gen- § 16. Offering Motion; Who tleman from Oklahoma yields to the May Offer gentleman for that purpose. MR. CLEVELAND: Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield? Member Controlling Debate MR. ALBERT: The gentleman from § 16.1 The Member in control Oklahoma does not yield for that purpose. of debate may move the pre- MR. CLEVELAND: Mr. Speaker, a par- vious question and cut off liamentary inquiry. Will there be any debate, either before or after opportunity to discuss the merits of the adoption of the rules. this case prior to a vote on the resolution offered by the gentleman from (17) On Jan. 4, 1965, the House Oklahoma? was considering House Resolution THE SPEAKER: The gentleman from 2, offered by the Majority Leader, Oklahoma has control over the time. Not unless the gentleman from Okla- 16. Wilbur D. Mills (Ark.). homa yields for that purpose. . . . 17. 111 CONG. REC.20, 89th Cong. 1st Sess. 18. John W. McCormack (Mass.).

4601