Bills, Resolutions, Petitions, and Memorials

CHAPTER 24

A. Introductory; Various Types of Bills, Resolutions, and Other Mechanisms for Action § 1. In General § 2. Bills § 3. Private Bills § 4. Joint Resolutions § 5. Concurrent Resolutions § 6. Simple Resolutions § 7. Resolutions of Approval or Disapproval of Execu- tive Plans; the ‘‘Legislative Veto’’ § 8. Resolutions of Inquiry § 9. Titles and Preambles § 10. Petitions and Memorials

B. General Procedures Associated With Passage of Legis- lation § 11. Readings § 12. Engrossment § 13. Transmission of Legislative Messages Between House and Senate § 14. Enrollment; Correcting Bills in Enrollment § 15. Signing § 16. Recalling Bills From the President

C. Veto Powers § 17. In General

Commentary and editing by David Paul Bird, J.D.

4773

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 8890 Sfmt 8890 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 DESCHELER’S PRECEDENTS

§ 18. Effect of Adjournment; the Pocket Veto § 19. Proposals for Item Veto § 20. Return of Vetoed Bills § 21. Motions Relating to Vetoes § 22. Consideration and Passage of Vetoed Bills; Voting § 23. Disposition of Vetoed Bills After Reconsideration

D. Vacating Legislative Actions § 24. Procedure

INDEX TO PRECEDENTS

Adjournment Concurrent resolution—Cont. bills signed during, §§ 15.9–15.11 conference managers authorized by, day certain, signing bill during ad- § 5.16 journment to, §§ 15.3, 15.7 conference report amended by, § 5.17 rescinding by concurrent resolution, engrossment of bill changed by, § 12.6 § 5.15 enrolled bill, correction in authorized sine die, authorization to sign, fol- by, § 14.7 lowing, §§ 15.1, 15.4 enrollment of bill changed by, Sec. 14.9 three days, by concurrent resolution, when more than, § 5.10 enrollment of bill, making technical Aggression, joint resolution author- corrections in, §§ 14.5, 14.7, 14.14– izing response to enemy’s, § 4.17 14.18 Amendment form, recalling bill from President, enrollment, omission in, amendment to § 16.1 correct, § 14.18 funds, providing for additional com- titles, amendment of, §§ 9.3, 9.4 mittee, § 5.7 Appropriation and revenue meas- greeting English royalty, § 5.34 ures, House prerogatives as to, hearings authorized by, § 5.6 § 13.3 honoring foreign governments, §§ 5.32, Committee jurisdiction of resolu- 5.33 tions of inquiry, § 8.1 Committee of the Whole honoring former Presidents, §§ 5.28, preamble consideration in, §§ 9.6, 9.7 5.29 suspension of proceedings in, to permit honoring military figures, §§ 5.30, 5.31 signing of bill, § 15.18 joint committee established by, §§ 5.2– Concurrent resolution 5.5 attendance at foreign meeting, author- joint session, providing for, §§ 5.19– izing Members’, § 5.27 5.24

4774

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 8876 Sfmt 8876 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24

Concurrent resolution—Cont. Discharge—Cont. legislative budget for fiscal year estab- resolution of inquiry, filed without lished by, § 5.25 written report, considered as dis- prayer room for Members established charged, § 8.12 by, § 5.26 Electoral votes, joint resolution preamble of, motion to strike, § 9.10 changing date for counting of, § 4.6 rescinding adjournment, § 5.15 Engrossment rescinding conference committee, § 5.18 changing by concurrent resolution, rescinding enrollment of bill, §§ 14.9– §§ 12.6, 12.7 14.12 changing by unanimous consent, rescinding passage of bill, § 5.14 §§ 12.8–12.13 return of enrolled bill to Senate, re- changing by unanimous consent, time- quested by, § 14.8 liness of, § 12.2 sine die adjournment, authorizing, Committee of the Whole, corrections §§ 5.8, 5.9 not in order in, § 12.2 text of bill changed by, §§ 5.12, 5.13 Senate amendment, engrossed copy of use of, § 5.1 bill corrected before action on, § 12.7 Conference committee, rescinding by simple resolution, effecting changes in, concurrent resolution, § 5.18 §§ 12.3, 12.5 Conference report, amending by con- star print, § 12.1 current resolution, § 5.17 Enrollment Consideration concurrent resolution rescinding, resolution of disapproval agreed to §§ 14.9–14.12 without debate, § 7.21 duty placed on Secretary of Senate, resolution of disapproval, precedence § 14.4 of, §§ 7.14, 7.15 resolution of disapproval, procedure enrolled House bill returned to the for, consideration of, § 7.12 Senate, § 14.8 resolution of inquiry, considered by House Administration, Committee on, unanimous consent, § 8.14 responsibility of, § 14.2 Convening Congress, joint resolution omission in, amendment to correct, setting date for, § 4.5 § 14.19 Declaration of war, joint resolution re-enrollment with a change, § 14.15 authorizing, § 4.16 technical corrections made by concur- Discharge rent resolution, §§ 14.5, 14.7, 14.14– resolution of disapproval, committee 14.18 discharged from consideration by Germaneness of titles, § 9.2 unanimous consent, § 7.6 Gulf of Tonkin resolution author- resolution of disapproval, limitation as izing military force, § 4.17 to debate on, §§ 7.8–7.10 Hearings, concurrent resolution au- resolution of disapproval, qualification thorizing, § 5.6 of Member moving to discharge, § 7.7 House–Senate conference, simple resolution of inquiry, debate after dis- resolution requesting, § 6.10 charge of, § 8.9 Interpretation of bills, §§ 2.1, 2.2

4775

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 8876 Sfmt 8876 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 DESCHELER’S PRECEDENTS

Joint committee Petitions, presentation of, by peti- concurrent resolution establishing, tioners, § 10.2 §§ 5.2–5.5 Preamble joint resolution establishing, § 4.10 generally, § 9.5 Joint resolutions amendment to, time for consideration, authorizing a publication, §§ 4.8, 4.9 §§ 9.8, 9.9, 9.11 constitutional amendment, §§ 4.1, 4.2 Committee of the Whole, considered in, continuing appropriations, § 4.3 §§ 9.6, 9.7 date for convening Congress, § 4.5 House concurrent resolution, motion to date for counting electoral votes, § 4.6 strike out, § 9.10 date for Presidential budget, § 4.7 strike out, motion to, § 9.10 date for reorganization plan, § 4.4 Prerogatives of the House regarding declaration of war, § 4.16 revenue bills and appropriation establishing a joint committee, § 4.10 measures, § 13.3 granting subpena power, § 4.11 Presidential budget, joint resolution honoring President Lincoln, §§ 4.14, setting date for submitting, § 4.7 4.15 Presidents, concurrent resolutions honoring President Truman, § 4.13 honoring former, §§ 5.28, 5.29 military action, resolution authorizing, Presidents, joint resolutions hon- § 4.17 oring, §§ 4.13–4.15 preamble, amendment of, § 9.11 Private bills travel appropriations, § 4.12 authorizing acceptance of foreign Joint session honor, § 3.1 concurrent resolution providing for, calendar, private, criteria for placing honoring George Washington, § 5.20 bill on, § 3.4 concurrent resolution providing for, to public bills distinguished, §§ 3.1–3.3 count electoral votes, § 5.23 Reading of bill concurrent resolution providing for, to full reading in Committee of the hear foreign dignitary, § 5.24 Whole, § 11.1 concurrent resolution providing for, to point of no quorum interrupting, § 11.2 hear Presidential communication, Senate practice, §§ 11.5, 11.6 §§ 5.19, 5.21, 5.22 Recalling bill from President Legislative budget, concurrent reso- concurrent resolution requesting Presi- lution establishing, § 5.25 dent to return bill, §§ 16.1, 16.6 Message from House to Senate re- message from President returning bill, garding enrolled bills, § 13.1 §§ 16.8, 16.9 Message from Senate to House regarding bill passage, § 13.2 postponing bill indefinitely after, § 16.5 Motion to lay resolution of inquiry re–enrollment, for purpose of, §§ 16.2– on the table, § 8.8 16.4 Motion to recommit, timeliness of, transmittal of returned bill to the Sen- §§ 11.3, 11.4 ate, § 16.7 Petitions and memorials introduced Recommit, timeliness of motion to, by request, § 10.1 §§ 11.3, 11.4

4776

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 8876 Sfmt 8876 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24

Referral of vetoed bill messaged Resolution of inquiry—Cont. from Senate, § 20.7 motion to lay on the table, § 8.8 Reorganization plan, joint resolution nonprivileged resolution soliciting setting date for, § 4.4 opinions, § 8.2 Resolution of approval or dis- privileged status, § 8.5 approval referred to House Calendar, § 8.6 affirmative majority vote for adoption reply to, referred to committee, § 8.11 of, § 7.25 reporting date, extension of, § 8.4 amendment prohibition, § 7.23 time for reporting, § 8.3 Committee of the Whole, report by, waiver of three-day availability re- House consideration of, § 7.24 quirement for report, § 8.13 consideration and debate, allotment of written report, resolution filed without, time to opposition for, § 7.22 § 8.12 consideration without debate, § 7.21 yields to Private Calendar, § 8.7 debate on, limited by unanimous con- Revenue and appropriation meas- sent, §§ 7.17–7.19 ures, House prerogatives as to, discharge by unanimous consent, § 7.6 § 13.3 discharge, limitation of debate on mo- Rules of the House tion to, §§ 7.8–7.10 simple resolution adopting, § 6.2 House as in Committee of the Whole, simple resolution amending, § 6.4 considered in, § 7.19 simple resolution waiving, § 6.3 House disapproval of reorganization Signing of bills and resolutions plan, Senate action relating to, adjournment, announcements as to §§ 7.26, 7.27 bills signed during, §§ 15.9–15.11 precedence of consideration, §§ 7.14, adjournment, authorizing signing dur- 7.15 ing, by resolution, §§ 15.1–15.3 privileged motion for consideration of, adjournment, unanimous consent au- § 7.11 thorizing for signing during, §§ 15.4– procedure for consideration of, § 7.12 15.8 reorganization plan, effective date, duplicate copies of bills, §§ 15.16, 15.17 §§ 7.3, 7.4 ‘‘during any adjournment,’’ §§ 15.3, Senate joint resolution passed, in lieu 15.7 of House version, § 7.2 interrupting proceedings in Committee termination of authority, provision for, of the Whole, § 15.18 in resolution of approval, § 7.1 President pro tempore signing bills, time limits on debate in Senate, § 7.16 §§ 15.2, 15.19 Resolution of inquiry remainder of session, signing author- committee action, § 8.10 ized for, §§ 15.2, 15.7 committee jurisdiction, §§ 8.1, 8.11 sine die adjournment, during, §§ 15.1, consideration by unanimous consent, 15.4 § 8.14 Speaker pro tempore signing bills, debate after discharge, § 8.9 §§ 15.14, 15.15 discharge by committee motion, § 8.12 vacated, §§ 15.12, 15.13

4777

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 8876 Sfmt 8876 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 DESCHELER’S PRECEDENTS

Simple resolution Titles—Cont. committee investigation authorized by, purpose of, § 9.1 §§ 6.5–6.7 Unanimous consent conference with Senate requested by, engrossment of bill changed by, § 6.10 §§ 12.8–12.13 effect of, § 6.1 Unanimous-consent request, timeli- engrossment of bill changed by, §§ 12.3, ness of request to change engross- 12.5 ment of bill, § 12.2 expressing sympathy, § 6.18 Vacating particular proceedings preamble amendable after adoption of, adoption of amendments, § 24.7 § 9.9 agreement to concurrent resolution, providing a standing order of business, § 24.10 § 6.11 agreement to simple resolutions, rescinding resolution previously adopt- §§ 24.8, 24.9 ed, § 6.9 passage of bills, §§ 24.1–24.4 response to subpena, resolution au- passage of joint resolution, § 24.11 thorizing, §§ 6.13–6.17 postponement, indefinite, of joint reso- rules of the House adopted by, § 6.2 lution, vacated, § 24.12 rules of the House amended by, § 6.4 reporting of bill by committee order, rules of the House waived by, § 6.3 § 24.6 Senate film report, providing for, § 6.12 ‘‘tabling’’ of bills, § 24.5 special rules, use of simple resolution Veto for, § 6.8 error in veto message, § 20.8 subpena, authorizing response to, item veto §§ 19.1, 19.2 §§ 6.13–6.17 message, personal delivery of, § 20.5 use of, § 6.1 pocket veto, notification of, §§ 18.1– Sine die adjournment 18.3 concurrent resolution providing for, presentation of bill to President de- §§ 5.8, 5.9 layed, legal question arising from, signing bills or resolutions during, § 17.3 §§ 15.1, 15.4 receipt of veto message announced, Special rules, simple resolutions § 20.2 used for, § 6.8 signing resolution similar to one pre- Subpena, joint resolution granting viously vetoed, § 17.7 power to, § 4.11 ten-day period, commencement of, Subpena, simple resolution author- §§ 17.1–17.5 izing response to, §§ 6.13–6.17 timeliness of, §§ 17.1–17.5 Table, motion to lay resolution of in- veto message laid before the House, quiry on, § 8.8 § 20.1 Titles veto message received by the Clerk, amendment of, §§ 9.3, 9.4 §§ 20.3, 20.4 germaneness of amendment to bill not veto message returned to President, determined by, § 9.2 § 20.9

4778

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 8876 Sfmt 8876 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24

Vetoed bill Vetoed bill—Cont. Calendar Wednesday, consideration of postpone consideration, motion to, as veto message on, § 22.4 privileged, § 21.10 consideration of veto message, effect of postpone, rejection of motion to, effect rejection of motion to postpone, § 21.2 of, § 21.2 consideration of veto message, motion precedence of motion to refer, § 21.1 to postpone, § 21.9 previous question, demand for as pre- consideration of veto message, motion cluding debate, § 22.9 to postpone, as privileged, § 21.10 recapitulation of vote, § 22.11, debate on motion to refer, § 21.12 debate on passing over President’s reference to committee, objection to, veto, §§ 22.7, 22.8 § 21.6 discharge, motion to, as privileged, refer, precedence of motion to, § 21.1 § 21.8 referred to committee by motion, § 21.4 failure to override, bill and veto message referred to committee after, referred to committee by unanimous § 23.1 consent, § 21.5 motion to refer defeated, effect of, reported from committee, § 22.5 § 21.3 report from committee as privileged, notification of House action on, § 23.2 § 22.6 notification of Senate action on, § 20.6 pairs on question of override, § 22.12 unfinished business, §§ 22.1–22.3 postpone consideration, motion to, gen- yeas and nays, requirement on over- erally, § 21.9 ride of, voting by, § 22.10

4779

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 8876 Sfmt 8876 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 8876 Sfmt 8876 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Bills, Resolutions, Petitions, and Memorials

A. INTRODUCTORY; VARIOUS TYPES OF BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, AND OTHER MECHANISMS FOR ACTION § 1. In General § 2. Bills The objectives of this chapter The term ‘‘bill,’’ as used in the are to define the various proce- Constitution,(1) refers to the chief dures by which measures are in- vehicle employed by the Congress troduced and considered by the in the enactment of laws under its Congress and to describe the formal steps through which legisla- legislative power. tion must pass in order to become Bills are categorized under two law. The role of the President in headings: public and private. The approving or vetoing measures former are general in their appli- submitted by the Congress is also cation, while the latter are specific considered. and are limited in application to While the greater part of the specified individuals or entities.(2) business considered and voted Chapter 2 of title I of the upon in the two Houses of Con- gress is legislative in character, United States Code contains the other kinds of business are taken following provision regarding the up by resolution either in one enacting clause of a bill: House alone or in both Houses § 101. The enacting clause of all Acts concurrently. These nonlegislative of Congress shall be in the following measures, while not having the form: ‘‘Be it enacted by the Senate and force of statute and usually lim- House of Representatives of the United ited to declarations of policy or to States of America in Congress Assem- the internal operations of Con- bled.’’ gress, nevertheless play an important procedural role. Examples of Cross Reference such business include measures Introduction and reference of bills, see expressing the opinions of Con- Ch. 16, supra. gress on political questions or establishing rules of parliamentary 1. U.S. Const. art. I, § 7. procedure. 2. See § 3, infra.

4781

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 2 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

Interpretation of Bills The Speaker: (4) The Chair has no information on the subject. Where did § 2.1 It is not in order for a the gentleman get his copy of the bill? Member to have distributed MR. FULLER: From a page. I send on the floor of the House this copy to the desk so that the Speaker may examine it. copies of a bill marked with MR. [J. BUELL] SNYDER [of Pennsyl- his own interpretation of its vania]: I can tell the gentleman how provisions. that came there. On Aug. 16, 1935,(3) during con- THE SPEAKER: The gentleman may sideration of a resolution (H. Res. state. 343) making in order the consider- MR. SNYDER: Mr. Speaker, I had so many of these bills sent to my office, ation of the Snyder-Guffey coal and with my secretarial help we wrote bill (H.R. 9100), Mr. Claude A. those words on that pink slip and Fuller, of Arkansas, raised the fol- pasted the slip on the bill. That is how lowing parliamentary inquiry: that happens to be there. I sent copies of these bills with the slip on them to MR. FULLER: Mr. Speaker, I rise to a parliamentary inquiry. I just sent a those interested and sent some of them page for the bill under consideration, to the desk back here, to be handed H.R. 9100, and received the copy which out upon request. It is altogether fit- I have in my hand. At the top of the ting and proper that I should do bill, pasted onto it is a pink slip, and so. . . . on that pink slip in typewriting are the THE SPEAKER: The Chair knows of words: no rule or authority for inserting a Bituminous-coal bill as amended statement like that to which the gen- and reprinted—controversial phases tleman has called attention on a bill, largely eliminated. Two-thirds of and the Chair instructs the pages of tonnage output operators favor bill, the House not to distribute any more and more than 95 percent of labor. bills carrying this sort of inscription to My inquiry is to know whether it is Members on the floor of the House. proper for anybody to paste such a thing as that on a document of the § 2.2 The Speaker does not House and whether it is proper for it rule on the effect of the pro- to be circulated in the House. This is the first time in my experience that I visions of a bill or whether have ever seen any advertisement on they might have been incor- an official document or bill pending in rectly drafted. the House. I rise for the purpose of (5) ascertaining how it came there and On May 3, 1949, during con- whether or not it is proper to be on sideration in the House of the Na- this bill. 4. Joseph W. Byrns (Tenn.). 3. 79 CONG. REC. 13433, 74th Cong. 1st 5. 95 CONG. REC. 5543, 5544, 81st Sess. Cong. 1st Sess.

4782

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 3

tional Labor Relations Act of 1949 Private laws constitute a signifi- (H.R. 2032), Mr. Adam Clayton cant portion of the total number of Powell, Jr., of New York, raised a laws passed by each Congress. For point of order: example, in the 92d Congress 161 private laws and 607 public laws MR. POWELL: If this bill uses lan- were enacted. (9) guage which is no longer in keeping The distinction between public with our laws, I raise the point of and private bills is sometimes dif- order that it is incorrectly drawn. On ficult to make. A statutory defini- page 53, line 13, this bill uses the lan- tion of a private bill was nacted in guage, ‘‘to review by the appropriate 1895 (10) and amended in 1905.(11) circuit court of appeals.’’ I make the However, this definition (12) was point of order that there is no longer any circuit court of appeals. removed from title 44 of the United States Code when that THE SPEAKER: (6) There might be 203 title was enacted into positive law Members take the same position that (13) the gentleman from New York does, in 1968. Through the years the but that does not alter the situation. were referred to the House Com- The question is on the engross- mittee on the Judiciary and 2,144 ment and third reading of the bill. bills and resolutions concerning individual immigration problems. U.S. § 3. Private Bills House of Representatives. Final Leg- islative Calendar, Committee on the Private legislation is the means Judiciary (92d Cong.), p. 10. by which the Congress grants re- 9. For a table listing private and public lief to ‘‘. . . one or several speci- laws enacted in each Congress since fied persons, corporations, institu- the 52d Congress, see Calendars of (7) the United States House of Rep- tions, etc. . . .’’ who may have resentatives and History of Legisla- no other legal remedy available to tion, Final Edition (92d Cong.), p. them. It also provides a means 261. whereby honoraria are granted to 10. Jan. 12, 1895, Ch. 23, § 55, 28 Stat. individuals, but by far its most 609. common usage pertains to grant- 11. Jan. 20, 1905, Ch. 50, § 2, 33 Stat. 611. ing a remedy to the personal and 12. ‘‘. . . The term ‘private bill’ shall be pecuniary grievances of individ- construed to mean all bills for the re- uals.(8) lief of private parties, bills granting pensions, bills removing political dis- 6. Sam Rayburn (Tex.). abilities, and bills for the survey of 7. 4 Hinds’ Precedents Sec. 3285. rivers and harbors.’’ Codified at 44 8. In the 92d Congress, for example, USC Sec. 189 (1964 ed). 609 bills and resolutions regarding 13. Oct. 22, 1968 Pub. L. No. 90–620, claims against the United States § 706, 82 Stat. 1238, 1248.

4783

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 3 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

term ‘‘private bill’’ has been used certain lands to a railroad com- to describe widely differing types pany; and requirements that the of legislation.(14) Foreign Claims Settlement Com- Since 1968, the preponderance mission determine or redetermine of private laws enacted by the the validity of claims of named in- House has continued to be for the dividuals against specified foreign relief of individuals devoid of governments. other legal remedy. Citizenship In the Legislative Reorganiza- for a person or persons otherwise tion Act of 1946,(17) Congress lim- ineligible on a technicality is fre- ited the types of measures that quently granted by private law. may be considered as private bills: A Speaker or former Speaker, Sec. 131. No private bill or resolution and Members of Congress have on (including so-called omnibus claims or more than one occasion been pension bills), and no amendment to granted permission to accept, or any bill or resolution, authorizing or accept and wear, a foreign decora- directing (1) the payment of money for property damages, for personal injuries (15) tion, when such acceptance or death for which suit may be insti- would otherwise be constitu- tuted under the Tort Claims Procedure tionally prohibited.(16) as provided in Title 28, United States Other purposes for which pri- Code, or for a pension (other than to vate laws have been enacted have carry out a provision of law or treaty stipulation); (2) the construction of a included: permitting free entry to bridge across a navigable stream; or (3) the United States of scientific and the correction of a military or naval musical apparatus destined for record, shall be received or considered use at specific colleges and univer- in the House.(18) sities; conveyance of real property Certain of the categories in and rights of the United States; which private bills were banned relief of certain named private under the act were delegated to businesses; exemption from tax- other agencies by other sections of ation of specific property in the the act. The Secretaries of War, District of Columbia; authoriza- the Navy, and the Treasury were tion for the Secretary of Agri- authorized to establish civilian culture to grant an easement over 17. Aug. 2, 1946, Ch. 753, 60 Stat. 812. 14. 4 Hinds Precedents § 3285. 18. 60 Stat. 831. This provision was in- 15. Priv. L. No. 89–61 (H.R. 10132); corporated into the rules of the Priv. L. No. 91–244 (H.J. Res. 1420); House in 1953. See Rule XXII clause Priv. L. No. 92–24 (H.J. Res. 850). 2, House Rules and Manual § 852 16. U.S. Const. art. I, § 9 clause 8. (1981).

4784

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 3

boards to review military and of an act of Congress,(1) Congress naval records to correct errors and has over the years enacted a se- remove any injustices.(19) The Fed- ries of laws allowing the adminis- eral Tort Claims Act provided ad- trative and judicial settlement of ministrative and judicial remedies claims against the United States in certain personal injury cases in order to alleviate the deter- involving negligence of federal em- mination of individual cases by ployees acting within the scope of means of private legislation. ( ) their employment. 20 And general The Court of Claims was cre- authority for the construction of ated by the Act of Feb. 24, 1855,(2) bridges over the navigable waters ‘‘. . . primarily to relieve the pres- of the United States was dele- sure on Congress caused by the gated to the Chief of Engineers volume of private bills.’’ (3) Under (21) and the Secretary of War. this act the court was directed to Today private bills considered hear claims and report its find- and passed in the Congress fall ings and recommendations to Con- largely into two major categories: gress. By the Act of Mar. 3, claims cases and immigration and 1863,(4) the judgments of the court naturalization cases. Other less were made final, but appeals to frequently introduced types of pri- the Supreme Court were allowed vate bills include conveyances of in certain cases. real property to identified individuals or private groups, bills affect- In 1887, Congress enacted the (5) ing military rank (though not cor- Tucker Act the whereby the ju- recting military records) of indi- risdiction of the court was greatly viduals, bills or resolutions paying expanded. Its present form in the tribute to or conferring awards or revised title 28 provides: medals upon living persons, bills The Court of Claims shall have juris- documenting private vessels, and diction to render judgment upon any bills permitting U.S. citizens to be claim against the United States found- employed by foreign governments. ed either upon the Constitution, or any Act of Congress, or any regulation of

Claims Cases 1. United States v Clarke, 8 Pet. (33 Since the United States may U.S.) 436 (1834). not be sued absent the authority 2. Ch. 122, 10 Stat. 612. 3. Opinion of Justice Harlan, Glidden 19. Sec. 207, 60 Stat. 837, now at 10 Company v Zdanok, 370 U.S. 530, USC § 1552. 552 (1962). 20. Title IV, §§ 401–403, 60 Stat. 842. 4. Ch. 92, § 5, 12 Stat. 765, 766. 21. Title V, §§ 501–511, 60 Stat. 847. 5. Mar. 3, 1887, Ch. 359, 24 Stat. 505.

4785

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 3 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

an executive department, or upon any tween judicial and congressional express or implied contract with the determination of claims cases is United States, or for liquidated or un- not complete since Congress fre- liquidated damages in cases not sound- quently refers private bills to the ing in tort. . . .(6) Court of Claims (13) for a deter- Congress has also authorized mination of the nature of the suits against the United States in claims ‘‘. . . and the amount, if the Court of Claims for patent in- any, legally or equitably due from fringement,(7) in U.S. District the United States. . . .’’(14) Court for admiralty and maritime Perhaps the clearest, although torts,(8) and in U.S. District Court indirect, statement upholding the for torts by employees of the gov- constitutional basis of private ernment while acting within the claims legislation was made by scope of their employment.(9) 13. 28 USC § 1492. Furthermore, the Congress has 14. 28 USC § 2509. The congressional (10) established the Customs Court, reference of claims has generated the Court of Customs and Patent some question as to the nature of the Appeals,(11) and the Tax Court (12) Court of Claims as legislative or con- to hear claims cases against the stitutional. That court and the Court government in these areas. of Customs and Patent Appeals were Cases that do not fall into any declared constitutional under art. III in Glidden v Zdanok, 370 U.S. 530 of the above categories or where a (1962). However, no clear standard statute of limitations under one of for pronouncing a court to be legisla- those judicial or administrative tive (art. I) rather than constitu- remedies has run, become possible tional (art. III) has been announced subjects for private legislation to by the Supreme Court. See: Constitu- be considered by the Congress tion of the United States of America pp. 590–596, S. Doc. No. 92–82, 92d itself. However, the separation be- Cong. 2d Sess. (1972). It is clear that a court is of a legis- 6. 28 USC § 1491. lative character when it performs 7. 28 USC § 1498 (1970 ed.). functions of a legislative or advisory 8. Feb. 28, 1920, Ch. 95, § 2, 41 Stat. nature which are subject to review 525, 46 USC § 742 (1970 ed.); and by a legislative or executive body. Mar. 3, 1925, Ch. 428, § 1, 43 Stat. See Gordon v United States, 5 Wall. 1112, 46 USC § 781 (1970 ed.). (72 U.S.) 419 (1867). Thus, the Court 9. Federal Tort Claims Act, 28 USC of Claims commissioners, not the §§ 1346(b), 2671 et seq. Court of Claims judges, are per- 10. 28 USC § 1581. forming a nonjudicial advisory func- 11. 28 USC § 211 et seq. tion under the congressional ref- 12. 28 USC § 7441 et seq. erence statute (28 USC § 2509(b)).

4786

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 3

the U.S. Supreme Court in the review of the case was denied by case of Pope v United States.(15) the Supreme Court, the petitioner That case was decided on appeal obtained a private law from Con- to the Supreme Court after the gress directing the Court of Court of Claims had refused to Claims to order payment of the give effect to a private law direct- costs in question. The Court of ing that court to render judgment Claims declined to follow this pri- for the petitioner. vate law on the grounds that it The petitioner first sued for the was an invasion of a judicial func- costs incurred in performing addition which that court had already tional work in connection with a exercised. contract with the government for The Supreme Court ruled that the construction of a tunnel as the private law in question did part of the water system of the not set aside the former judgment District of Columbia. The Court of but created a new obligation on Claims denied these costs since the part of the government where such additional work was not none existed before. Mr. Chief specified in the contract. After a Justice Stone, writing for the Court, went on to say: 15. 323 U.S. 1 (1944). The Supreme Court on two occa- We perceive no constitutional obsta- sions has upheld the validity of pri- cle to Congress’ imposing on the Gov- vate laws affecting controversies be- ernment a new obligation where there tween individuals. Those cases were had been none before, for work per- Maynard v Hill, 125 U.S. 190 (1888), formed by petitioner which was bene- and Paramino Co. v Marshall, 309 ficial to the Government and for which U.S. 370 (1940). The former involved Congress thought (petitioner) had not a private law granting an individual been adequately compensated. The an ex parte divorce in the Oregon power of Congress to provide for the Territory, and the latter involved a payment of debts, conferred by § 8 of private law directing the reopening Article I of the Constitution, is not re- of a work injury case against a pri- stricted to payment of those obligations which are legally binding on the Gov- vate insurance carrier under the ernment. It extends to the creation of Longshoremen’s and Harbor Work- such obligations in recognition of ers’ Compensation Act. A commen- claims which are merely moral or hon- tator has suggested that such laws orary.(16) would not be upheld today under modern concepts of equal protection A similar interpretation of arti- (Private Bills in Congress, 79 Harv. cle I, section 8, clause 1 of the L. Rev. 1684, 1696.) Private bills now generally do not affect rights be- 16. Pope v United States, 323 U.S. 1 at tween individuals. p. 9.

4787

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 3 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

Constitution was announced by Congress has acted to exempt in- the Supreme Court in 1895 in the dividuals from the application of case of United States v Realty the law in hardship cases where Company.(17) Although that case the law would otherwise prohibit did not involve a private law, it entry into or require deportation did provide to a class of individ- from the United States, or where uals the type of relief that is dis- individuals are capable of ren- pensed under a private bill. The dering service to the nation but Court said, ‘‘The term ‘debts’ in- are otherwise incapable of ful- cludes those debts or claims which filling citizenship requirements. rest upon a merely equitable or Deportation cases are inher- honorary obligation, and which ently difficult because, by the na- would not be recoverable in a ture of the process, an individual court of law if existing against an subject to deportation is likely to individual.’’ (18) be removed from the country be- In 1949, the Court of Claims, fore a private bill exempting him citing both the Pope and Realty can be introduced and considered Co. cases, made clear that the in Congress. To alleviate this ‘‘debts’’ of the United States to be problem the Department of Jus- paid by private legislation are not tice and the House and Senate Ju- limited in their determination by diciary Committees follow a proce- ‘‘. . . principles of right and jus- dure under which the deportation tice as administered by courts of of an individual will be halted equity, but (by) the broader moral when a private bill has been intro- sense based upon general equi- duced on his behalf and the Com- table consideration. . . .’’ (19) mittee on the Judiciary of either the House or Senate has re- Immigration Cases quested a report from the Immi- The second major subject of pri- gration and Naturalization Serv- vate legislation now considered in ice.(2) Congress involves situations aris- 2. Rules of the Committee on the Judi- ing under the immigration and ciary, Subcommittee on Immigration, ( ) naturalization laws. 1 Specifically, U.S. House of Representatives, Rule No. 3, 93d Cong. (1973). Rule 4 of 17. 163 U.S. 427. these rules provides further, that a 18. Id. at p. 440. departmental report shall not be re- 19. Burkhardt v United States, 84 F quested in cases of those ‘‘. . . who Supp 553, 559 (Ct. Cl. 1949). have entered the United States as 1. 8 USC §§ 1101–1503 (1970). nonimmigrants, stowaways, in tran-

4788

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 3

Collateral References On Aug. 3, 1965,(3) the House Col. M. T. Bennett. Private Claims Acts passed a private bill (H.R. 10132) and Congressional References, Re- to authorize the Honorable Joseph printed by House Committee on the W. Martin, Jr., of Massachusetts, Judiciary. 90th Cong. 2d Sess. (Com- a former Speaker, to accept from mittee Print 1968). Private Bills in Congress. 79 Harv. L. the Government of Portugal the Rev. 1684 (1966). award of the Military Order of Private Bills and the Immigration Law. Christ with the rank of Grande 69 Harv. L. Rev. 1083 (1956). Officer.(4) Gelhorn and Lauer. Congressional Settle- ment of Tort Claims Against the Indemnifying a Foreign Gov- United States, 55 Colum. L. Rev. 1 (1955). ernment

f § 3.2 A bill to indemnify a foreign government for injury Authorizing Acceptance of For- to its nationals is a public eign Honors or Awards bill. ( ) § 3.1 A private bill authorizing On Apr. 6, 1936, 5 the Clerk a former Speaker of the called on the Consent Calendar House to accept an award 3. 111 CONG. REC. 19210, 89th Cong. from a foreign government 1st Sess. passed the House on the Pri- 4. See also H.R. 11227, authorizing vate Calendar. Representative Eugene J. Keogh (N.Y.), to accept the award of the sit, deserting crewmen, or by surrep- Order of Isabella the Catholic from titiously entering without inspection Spain. 112 CONG. REC. 12480, 89th through the land or sea borders of Cong. 2d Sess., June 7, 1966. the United States.’’ Congress has by law consented to The committee has subsequently the acceptance of decorations by placed further conditions and restric- Members, officers, or employees of tions on when and in what types of the House. [See 5 USC § 7342(d), cases it will request a report. Foreign Gifts and Decorations Act, Under a prior practice, mere intro- Pub. L. No. 95–105.] The Committee duction of a bill was sufficient to on Standards of Official Conduct has stay deportation. The procedure was promulgated regulations concerning recognized in United States ex rel. such acceptance and retention of Knauff v McGrath (171 F2d 839, 2d decorations and gifts from foreign cir. 1950), where a writ of habeas governments (see Ethics Manual for corpus was issued staying the depor- Members and Employees, published tation of one on whose behalf a pri- each Congress by the committee). vate bill granting admission has 5. 80 CONG. REC. 5027, 5028, 74th been introduced in Congress. Cong. 2d Sess.

4789

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 3 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

the bill (H.R. 11961) authorizing hear, consider, and report upon a an appropriation for the payment claim of the Choctaw and Chicka- of the claim of General Higinio Al- saw Indian nations or tribes for varez, a Mexican citizen, with re- fair and just compensation for cer- spect to certain lands in Arizona. tain lands. Mr. Jesse P. Wolcott, of Michigan, Mr. William H. Stafford, of Wis- raised a point of order against consin, raised a point of order consideration of the bill on the against the bill contending that it was a private bill: grounds that it was of a private character and should be on the A private bill is a bill for the relief of one or several specified persons, cor- Private Calendar instead of the porations, institutions, etc., and is dis- Consent Calendar. tinguished from a public bill, which re- The Speaker (6) ruled, ‘‘In the lates to public matters and deals with opinion of the Chair, this is a pub- individuals by classes only. lic bill. It provides that part of The Chair (9) ruled that, ‘‘. . . this money shall be paid to the As the Chair recollects the law, Government of Mexico.’’ (7) the United States deals with the Choctaw and Chickasaw tribes as Indian Claims nations and through treaties. Therefore this bill deals with the § 3.3 A bill dealing with Indi- Indians as a nation and not with ans as a nation and not with Indians as individuals. The Chair Indians as individuals is a believes that this is a public bill public bill. and is properly on the public calendar, and overrules that point of (8) On Feb. 4, 1931, the Clerk order. . . .’’ called on the House Calendar the bill (S. 3165) conferring jurisdic- Disposition of Private Bills tion upon the Court of Claims to § 3.4 Where a bill affects an in- 6. Joseph W. Byrns (Tenn.). dividual or particular indi- 7. Speaker Byrns cited Cannon’s Proce- viduals or corporations or in- dure (p. 335, 1963 ed.) for authority stitutions, it should go to the that, ‘‘A bill to indemnify a foreign government for injury to its nation- Private Calendar. als’’ is a public bill. For a similar rul- On Mar. 17, 1930,(10) Mr. Wil- ing by Speaker William B. Bankhead liam H. Stafford, of Wisconsin, (Ala.), see 81 CONG. REC. 649, 75th Cong. 1st Sess., Feb. 1, 1937. 9. Earl C. Michener (Mich.). 8. 73 CONG. REC. 3969–71, 71st Cong. 10. 72 CONG. REC. 5454, 71st Cong. 2d 3d Sess. Sess.

4790

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 4

raised a point of order against the submission to the President for consideration on the Consent Cal- approval under article I, section 7. endar of the bill (H.R. 5917), for When a joint resolution is ap- the relief of certain newspapers proved by the President, or when (for advertising services rendered he fails to return it to the Con- the Public Health Service), that it gress within the prescribed time, was a private bill and not prop- or when he vetoes it and his veto erly on the Consent Calendar. is overridden it becomes public law and it is published in the The Chair (11) ruled that, ‘‘. . . statutes-at-large as such.(12) Where a bill affects an individual, Thus, the joint resolution is con- individuals, corporations, institu- sidered in the same manner as a tions, and so forth, it should and bill, with one important exception: does go to the Private Calendar. where a joint resolution is used to Where it applies to a class and bring about a constitutional not to individuals as such, it then amendment,(13) the resolution, becomes a general bill and would after approval thereof by both be entitled to a place on the Con- Houses by two-thirds vote, is sub- sent Calendar. In the judgment of mitted to the states for ratifica- the Chair this bill, while affecting tion. It is not submitted to the a class of concerns, specifies indi- President.(14) viduals, and for the purpose of the There are no established rules rule the Chair holds that the bill requiring the use of a joint resolu- is improperly on this [Consent] Calendar and transfers it as of 12. 1 USC §§ 106, 106a, 112. the date of the original reference 13. Since 1936 the following amendments to the Constitution have been to the Private Calendar.’’ adopted pursuant to joint resolutions: 22d amendment, H.J. Res. 27. 93 CONG. REC. 2392, 80th Cong. 1st § 4. Joint Resolutions Sess., Mar. 21, 1947; 23d amendment, S.J. Res. 39. 106 CONG. REC. The joint resolution is another 12858, 86th Cong. 2d Sess., June 16, legislative instrument employed 1960; 24th amendment, S.J. Res. 29. 108 CONG. REC. 17670, 87th Cong. by the Congress in the exercise of 2d Sess., Sept. 14, 1962; 25th its power under article I, section 1 amendment, S.J. Res. 1. 111 CONG. of the Constitution. It is the type REC. 15593, 89th Cong. 1st Sess., of measure that requires an af- July 6, 1965; and 26th amendment, firmative vote by both Houses and S.J. Res. 7. 117 CONG. REC. 7570, 92d Cong. 1st Sess., Mar. 23, 1971. 11. Earl C. Michener (Mich.). 14. U.S. Const. art. 5.

4791

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 4 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

tion rather than of a public bill, or lowing form: ‘‘Resolved by the Senate vice versa, in the consideration and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress and enactment of legislation. assembled.’’ However, in practice joint resolutions are not now used for pur- f poses of general legislation. They Constitutional Amendment are used for special purposes and for such incidental matters as § 4.1 It is permissible on the changing or fixing effective floor of the Senate, where a dates,(15) to establish joint com- germaneness rule is not op- mittees or provide a commission erating, to amend a joint res- with subpena power,(16) or to pro- olution that is legislative in vide continuing appropriations.(17) character by striking all The joint resolution, because it after the resolving clause permits the use of a preamble and inserting provisions of a (which is not appropriate in a constitutional amendment. bill), is also used where it is nec- On Mar. 26, 1962,(19) during essary to set forth in the legisla- consideration in the Senate of a tion the events or state of facts joint resolution (S.J. Res. 29) es- which prompt the measure. For tablishing the former dwelling this reason, declarations of war house of Alexander Hamilton as a have been made by joint resolu- national monument, Senator ( ) tion. 18 Spessard L. Holland, of Florida, Chapter 2 of title I of the offered an amendment in the na- United States Code contains the ture of a substitute proposing to following provision regarding the amend the Constitution to abolish enacting clause of a joint resolu- the poll tax. Senator Richard B. tion: Russell, of Georgia, raised a point § 102. The resolving clause of all of order against the amend- (20) joint resolutions shall be in the fol- ment: . . . I take the position that the Con- 15. See § 4.4 et seq., infra. stitution itself prescribes the method 16. See §§ 4.10, 4.11, infra. by which it may be amended, and that 17. See § 4.3, infra. the pending proposal does not appear 18. See § 4.16, infra. in the Constitution as a means where- Note: Joint resolutions may contain preambles which are amendable 19. 108 CONG. REC. 5042, 87th Cong. 2d after engrossment and prior to third Sess. reading of the joint resolution. 20. Id. at pp. 5083–87 (Mar. 27).

4792

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 4

by a proposed constitutional amend- out any authority to do so, a third ment may be submitted to the several method of amending the Constitution, States. I further submit that in the by saying that a proposed amendment 173 years since the Constitution of the to the Constitution can be appended to United States was first ratified and ap- the joint resolution now under consid- proved, no attempt whatever has ever eration. been made to distort the constitutional Mr. President, this is wholly uncon- process. This is the first time in 173 stitutional procedure. Nothing in the years that an effort has been made to Constitution warrants it. Nothing in use a piece of proposed general legisla- the precedents of the Senate justifies tion as a vehicle for amending the Con- it, although over the years we have stitution of the United States and sub- had almost every precedent of which mitting that amendment to the several the mind of man can conceive. . . . States. . . . MR. [MIKE] MANSFIELD [of Montana]: In article V we find the language to Mr. President, I think it is clear that which the great interest of Congress the proposal of the Senator from Flor- should be devoted. Yet instead of a res- ida is entirely in accord with the Con- olution in the form prescribed or indi- stitution of the United States and with cated in article V, and followed for the the Senate rules. On the question of 173 years that Congress has been final adoption of Senate Joint Resolu- meeting, an attempt is made to utilize tion 29, as amended by the Holland a piece of proposed legislation, respect- substitute, two-thirds of the Senate able enough in itself, proposing a me- must vote in the affirmative if the res- morial to a great American who has olution is to be agreed to. The same not yet had any memorial erected in will be true in the House of Represent- his honor; but which requires the ordinary legislative process requiring the atives. The joint resolution, as thus signature of the President or else a amended, will then be submitted to the vote on the part of Congress to over- several States for ratification. There- ride a veto by the President. fore, all the requirements of the Con- Mr. President, the amendment of the stitution and of our rules will have Constitution of the United States is a been met. procedure which is solely between the Mr. President, I move that the ques- Congress and the several States. This tion of constitutionality as raised by is the only process from which the the distinguished Senator from Geor- President of the United States is com- gia be laid on the table, and I ask for pletely excluded. Nothing in the Con- the yeas and nays. stitution indicates that the President The motion was agreed to (58 shall even see a proposed amendment (21) of the Constitution. He has no author- yeas, 34 nays). ity to veto it. There is no requirement that he approve it. Nothing in the Con- § 4.2 A joint resolution pro- stitution indicates that it shall even be posing an amendment to the brought to his attention. Constitution may be amend- Yet the Senate is undertaking to add to article V of the Constitution, with- 21. Id. at pp. 5086, 5087.

4793

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 4 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

ed in the Senate by a sub- On Aug. 25, 1965,(3) Mr. George stitute providing legislative H. Mahon, of Texas, made the fol- provisions designed to ac- lowing statement: complish the same result. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to the unani- On Feb. 2, 1960,(1) during con- mous-consent agreement of yesterday, I call up the joint resolution (H.J. Res. sideration in the Senate of a joint 639) making continuing appropriations resolution (S.J. Res. 39) to amend for the fiscal year 1966, and for other the Constitution to allow Gov- purposes, and ask unanimous consent ernors to fill temporary vacancies that it be considered in the House as in Committee of the Whole. . . . in the House of Representatives, THE SPEAKER: (4) Is there objection to Senator Jacob K. Javits, of New the request of the gentleman from York, raised the following par- Texas? liamentary inquiry: There was no objection.

I understand that it will be in order, Fixing Date for Reorganization after action is taken on the Holland amendment, for me to move as sub- Plan stitute for the entire joint resolution a statutory provision to accomplish the § 4.4 A joint resolution has same result. Is that correct? been used to fix the date THE PRESIDING OFFICER: (2) The Sen- when certain reorganization ator is correct. plans of the President shall go into effect. Continuing Appropriations On June 1, 1939,(5) the House § 4.3 Measures providing con- considered the following Senate tinuing appropriations for a joint resolution (S.J. Res. 138): fiscal year are enacted by Resolved, etc., That the provisions of joint resolution, and such reorganization plan No. I, submitted to the Congress on April 25, 1939, and joint resolutions, when pre- the provisions of reorganization plan viously made in order by No. II, submitted to the Congress on unanimous consent, are May 9, 1939, shall take effect on July called up as privileged, even 1, 1939, notwithstanding the provi- though they are not now con- sions of the Reorganization Act of 1939. sidered general appropriations bills. 3. 111 CONG. REC. 21751, 89th Cong. 1st Sess. 1. 106 CONG. REC. 1747, 86th Cong. 2d 4. John W. McCormack (Mass.). Sess. 5. 84 CONG. REC. 6527, 76th Cong. 1st 2. Edmund S. Muskie (Me.). Sess.

4794

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 4

With the following committee Change in Date for Counting amendment: Electoral Votes Page 1, after line 8, insert the following: § 4.6 A joint resolution has ‘‘Sec. 2. Nothing in such plans or this been used to change the date joint resolution shall be construed as for the counting of the elec- having the effect of continuing any agency or function beyond the time toral votes. when it would have terminated with- On Feb. 7, 1956,(8) the House out regard to such plans or this joint considered and passed the fol- resolution or of continuing any func- lowing joint resolution (H.J. Res. tion beyond the time when the agency 517): in which it was vested would have terminated without regard to such plans Whereas January 6, 1957, is a Sun- or this joint resolution.’’ day; and Whereas Public Law 771, 80th Con- Fixing Date for Convening gress (62 Stat. 672, 675), provides that Congress ‘‘Congress shall be in session on the 6th day of January succeeding every meeting of the (Presidential) electors’’ § 4.5 A joint resolution has for the purpose of counting the elec- been used to fix the day of toral votes: Therefore be it meeting of a new session of Resolved, etc., That the two Houses Congress in lieu of the reg- of Congress shall meet in the Hall of ular meeting date. the House of Representatives on Mon- day the 7th day of January 1957, at 1 On Dec. 30, 1941,(6) the House o’clock postmeridian, pursuant to the considered and passed the fol- requirements of the Constitution and lowing joint resolution (S.J. Res. laws relating to the election of Presi- dent and Vice President of the United 123): States. Resolved, etc., That the second session of the Seventy-seventh Congress a different day.’’ U.S. Const. amend. shall begin at noon on Monday, Janu- 20, § 2. ary 5, 1942, and the first session of the See also 111 CONG. REC. 28563, Seventy-eight Congress shall begin at 89th Cong. 1st Sess., Oct. 22, 1965; noon on Monday, January 4, 1943.(7) 105 CONG. REC. 19364, 19365, 86th Cong. 1st Sess., Sept. 12, 1959; joint 6. 87 CONG. REC. 10126–31, 77th Cong. resolution pocket vetoed 102 CONG. 1st Sess. REC. 15294, 84th Cong. 2d Sess., 7. The Constitution provides: ‘‘The Con- July 27, 1956; and 93 CONG. REC. gress shall assemble at least once in 10521, 80th Cong. 1st Sess., July 26, every year, and such meeting shall 1947. begin at noon on the 3d day of Janu- 8. 102 CONG. REC. 2220, 84th Cong. 2d ary, unless they shall by law appoint Sess.

4795

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 4 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

Change in Date for Submission printing of additional copies of Presidential Budget of ‘‘Senate Procedure’’ and making such publications § 4.7 A joint resolution has subject to copyright. been used to postpone the (11) dates for the submission of On Oct. 16, 1963, the House the President’s budget mes- considered and passed the fol- sage and economic report. lowing joint resolution (S.J. Res. 123): On Jan. 6, 1965,(9) the House considered and passed the fol- Resolved by the Senate and House of lowing joint resolution (H.J. Res. Representatives of the United States of 123): America in Congress assembled, That there shall be printed and bound for Resolved by the Senate and House of the use of the Senate one thousand Representatives of the United States of five hundred copies of a revised edition America in Congress assembled, That of Senate Procedure, to be prepared by (a) notwithstanding the provisions of Charles L. Watkins, Parliamentarian, section 201 of the Act of June 10, 1922, and Floyd M. Riddick, Assistant Par- as amended (31 U.S.C. 11), the Presi- liamentarian, to be printed under the dent shall transmit to the Congress not supervision of the authors and to be later than January 25, 1965, the budg- distributed to the Members of the Sen- et for the fiscal year 1966, and (b) notwithstanding the provisions of section ate. 3 of the Act of February 20, 1946, as Sec. 2. That, notwithstanding any amended (15 U.S.C. 1022), the Presi- provisions of the copyright laws and dent shall transmit to the Congress not regulations with respect to publica- later than January 28, 1965, the Eco- tions in the public domain, such edi- nomic Report.(10) tion of Senate Procedure shall be subject to copyright by the authors there- Authorizing Printing of Publi- of. cation § 4.9 The House agreed to a § 4.8 A joint resolution has joint resolution providing for been used to authorize the the printing of ‘‘Cannon’s Procedure in the House of 9. 111 CONG. REC. 134, 135, 89th Cong. Representatives.’’ 1st Sess. ( ) 10. For a joint resolution postponing the On Mar. 25, 1959, 12 the House dates set by law for the transmittal considered and passed the fol- of the President’s economic report and the report thereon by the Joint 11. 109 CONG. REC. 19611, 88th Cong. Economic Committee, see 115 CONG. 1st Sess. REC. 40901, 91st Cong. 1st Sess., 12. 105 CONG. REC. 5259, 5260, 86th Dec. 22, 1969. Cong. 1st Sess.

4796

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 4

lowing joint resolution (H.J. Res. pointed by the Speaker of the House of 301): Representatives, and seven Members of the Senate to be appointed by the Resolved by the Senate and House of President pro tempore of the Senate. Representatives of the United States of In each instance not more than four America in Congress assembled, That members shall be members of the there shall be printed and bound for same political party.(14) the use of the House one thousand five hundred copies of ‘‘Cannon’s Procedure Grant of Subpena Power in the House of Representatives’’, by Clarence Cannon, to be printed under § 4.11 The House agreed to a the supervision of the author and to be distributed to the Members by the joint resolution granting sub- Speaker. pena powers to the commis- Sec. 2. That, notwithstanding any sion appointed by the Presi- provision of the copyright laws and dent to report on the assas- regulations with respect to publica- sination of President John F. tions in the public domain, ‘‘Cannon’s Procedure in the House of Representa- Kennedy. tives’’ shall be subject to copyright by On Dec. 10, 1963,(15) the House the author thereof. considered and passed a joint resolution (S.J. Res. 137) stating in Establishing a Joint Com- part: mittee Resolved by the Senate and House of § 4.10 The House considered a Representatives of the United States of joint resolution proposing America in Congress assembled, That (a) for the purposes of this joint resolu- the establishment of a joint tion, the term ‘Commission’ means the committee to investigate Commission appointed by the Presi- crime. dent by Executive Order 11130, dated On July 12, 1968,(13) the House November 29, 1963. (b) The Commission, or any member considered the following joint res- of the Commission when so authorized olution (H.J. Res. 1): by the Commission, shall have power Resolved by the Senate and House of to issue subpenas requiring the attend- Representatives of the United States of ance and testimony of witnesses and America in Congress assembled, That the production of any evidence that re- (a) there is hereby created a Joint lates to any matter under investigation Committee To Investigate Crime, to be composed of seven Members of the 14. Investigations generally, see Ch. 15, House of Representatives to be ap- supra; creating committees, see Ch. 17, supra. 13. 114 CONG. REC. 21012, 90th Cong. 15. 109 CONG. REC. 23941, 88th Cong. 2d Sess. 1st Sess.

4797

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 4 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

by the Commission. The Commission, of the month in which the Seventy- or any member of the Commission or sixth Congress adjourns sine die at the any agent or agency designated by the second session thereof, so much as may Commission for such purpose, may ad- be necessary for each the Senate and minister oaths and affirmations, exam- House of Representatives. ine witnesses, and receive evidence. Presidential Honors Travel Appropriations § 4.13 The House considered a § 4.12 The House considered a joint resolution providing for joint resolution making ap- a Presidential proclamation propriations for mileage for recognizing former President the Vice President, Senators, Truman’s role in the creation Representatives, Delegates, of the United Nations. and Commissioners, and for On Sept. 26, 1968,(17) the House pay of pages incidental to a considered and passed the fol- special session of Congress. lowing joint resolution (H.J. Res. On Sept. 25, 1939,(16) the House 1459): considered and passed the fol- Resolved by the Senate and House of lowing joint resolution (H.J. Res. Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That 384): the President of the United States is Resolved, etc., That the following hereby authorized and requested to sums are hereby appropriated, out of issue on October 24, 1968, a proclama- any money in the Treasury not other- tion recognizing the significant part wise appropriated, for the payment of which Harry S. Truman, as President expenses incident to the second session of the United States, played in the cre- of the Seventy-sixth Congress, namely: ation of the United Nations. For mileage of the President of the § 4.14 The House considered a Senate and of Senators, $51,000. For mileage of Representatives, the joint resolution providing for Delegate from Hawaii, and the Resi- a joint session of Congress to dent Commissioner from Puerto Rico, commemorate the 150th an- and for expenses of the Delegate from niversary of the birth of Alaska, $171,000. Abraham Lincoln. For the payment of 21 pages for the ( ) Senate and 48 pages for the House of On July 24, 1958, 18 the House Representatives, at $4 per day each, considered and passed the fol- for the period commencing September 21, 1939, and ending with the last day 17. 114 CONG. REC. 28327, 90th Cong. 2d Sess. 16. 85 CONG. REC. 16, 76th Cong. 2d 18. 104 CONG. REC. 15019, 15020, 85th Sess. Cong. 2d Sess.

4798

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 4

lowing joint resolution (H.J. Res. the United States, the Chief Justice 648): and Associate Justices of the Supreme Court, the diplomatic corps, assistant Whereas Thursday, February 12, heads of departments, and the mem- 1959, will mark the 150th anniversary bers of the Lincoln Sesquicentennial of the birth of Abraham Lincoln, 16th Commission be invited to join in this President of the United States; and commemoration. Whereas Mr. Lincoln is our best example of that personal fulfillment § 4.15 The House considered a which American institutions permit joint resolution providing for and encourage; and . . . Whereas on Monday, February 12, a ceremony to commemorate 1866, in the presence of the President the 100th anniversary of Lin- of the United States, the members of coln’s second inauguration. his Cabinet, the Chief Justice and As- (19) sociate Justices of the Supreme Court, On June 23, 1964, the House the diplomatic corps, officers of the considered and passed the fol- Army and Navy, assistant heads of de- lowing joint resolution (H.J. Res. partments, the governors of States and 925): Territories, and others in authority, the two Houses of Congress convened Whereas March 4, 1965, will be the in joint session to hear ‘‘an address one hundredth anniversary of the sec- upon the life and character of Abra- ond inauguration of Abraham Lincoln ham Lincoln, late President of the as President of the United States; and United States,’’ pronounced by an emi- Whereas President Lincoln in his in- nent historian, the Honorable George augural address looked to the end of a Bancroft: Now, therefore, be it great fratricidal struggle and spoke, Resolved, etc., That on Thursday, ‘‘with malice toward none and charity February 12 next, the sesquicentennial for all,’’ of ‘‘a just and lasting peace of the birth of Abraham Lincoln shall among ourselves and with all nations’’; be commemorated by a joint session of and . . . the Congress, and to that end the Whereas today a part of the aspira- President of the Senate will appoint 4 tions which Abraham Lincoln held for Members of the Senate and the Speak- the people of the United States has er of the House will appoint 4 Mem- been achieved: Now, therefore, be it bers of the House of Representatives Resolved by the Senate and House of jointly to constitute a Committee on Representatives of the United States of Arrangements. America in Congress assembled, That The Committee on Arrangements on Wednesday, March 4 next, the one shall plan the proceedings, issue ap- hundredth anniversary of Abraham propriate invitations, and select a dis- Lincoln’s second inauguration shall be tinguished Lincoln scholar to deliver commemorated by such observance as the memorial address; and be it fur- may be determined by the committee ther Resolved, That the President of the 19. 110 CONG. REC. 14699, 88th Cong. United States, the Vice President of 2d Sess.

4799

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 4 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

on arrangements in cooperation with sources of the country are hereby the National Civil War Centennial pledged by the Congress of the United Commission, the Civil War Centennial States.(1) Commission of the District of Colum- bia, and the Lincoln Group of the Dis- § 4.17 The House adopted a trict of Columbia. joint resolution relating to Immediately upon passage of this hostilities in Southeast Asia resolution, the President of the Senate shall appoint four Members of the Sen- and supporting the Presi- ate and the Speaker of the House shall dent’s actions to repel ag- appoint four Members of the House of gression by North Vietnam. Representatives jointly to constitute a On Aug. 7, 1964,(2) the House committee on arrangements. considered and passed the fol- Declaration of War lowing joint resolution (H.J. Res. 1145): § 4.16 The House adopted a Whereas naval units of the Com- joint resolution declaring munist regime in Vietnam, in violation war on Japan. of the principles of the Charter of the On Dec. 8, 1941,(20) the House United Nations and of international law, have deliberately and repeatedly passed the following joint resolu- attacked United States naval vessels tion (H.J. Res. 254): lawfully present in international wa- Whereas the Imperial Government of ters, and have thereby created a seri- Japan has committed repeated acts of ous threat to international peace; and war against the Government and the Whereas these attacks are part of a people of the United States of America: deliberate and systematic campaign of Therefore be it aggression that the Communist regime Resolved, etc., That the state of war in North Vietnam has been waging between the United States and the Im- against its neighbors and the nations perial Government of Japan which has thus been thrust upon the United 1. For other joint resolution declaring States is hereby formally declared; and war, see also: (1) against Rumania, that the President be, and he is here- 88 CONG. REC. 4818, 77th Cong. 2d by, authorized and directed to employ Sess., June 3, 1942; (2) against Hun- the entire naval and military forces of gary, 88 CONG. REC. 4817, 77th the United States and the resources of Cong. 2d Sess., June 3, 1942; (3) the Government to carry on war against Bulgaria, 88 CONG. REC. against the Imperial Government of 4816, 77th Cong. 2d Sess., June 3, Japan; and to bring the conflict to a 1942; and (4) against Germany and successful termination all of the re- Italy, 87 CONG. REC. 9665, 9666, 77th Cong. 1st Sess., Dec. 11, 1941. 20. 87 CONG. REC. 9519, 9520, 77th 2. 110 CONG. REC. 18538, 18539, 88th Cong. 1st Sess. Cong. 2d Sess.

4800

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 5

joined with them in the collective de- § 5. Concurrent Resolu- fense of their freedom; and Whereas the United States is assist- tions ing the peoples of southeast Asia to protect their freedom and has no terri- Concurrent resolutions are used torial, military or political ambitions in as a means by which the two that area, but desires only that these Houses may concurrently express peoples should be left in peace to work certain facts, or declare certain out their own destinies in their own principles, opinions, or purposes. way: Now, therefore, be it Resolved by the Senate and House of A concurrent resolution is binding Representatives of the United States of on neither House until agreed to America in Congress assembled, That by both. They are not used in the the Congress approves and supports adoption of general legislation. the determination of the President, as Concurrent resolutions are used Commander in Chief, to take all nec- in the adoption of joint rules, set- essary measures to repel any armed attack against the forces of the United ting up joint committees, express- States and to prevent further aggres- ing the sense of Congress on prop- sion. ositions,(3) and in recent years as Sec. 2. The United States regards as vehicles by which both Houses are vital to its national interest and to permitted to approve or dis- world peace the maintenance of inter- approve of certain executive ac- national peace and security in southeast Asia. Consonant with the Con- tions, pursuant to laws containing stitution of the United States and the mechanisms for such procedures Charter of the United Nations and in (see House Rules and Manual, accordance with its obligations under 97th Congress, ‘‘Congressional the Southeast Asia Collective Defense Disapproval’’ provisions contained Treaty, the United States is, therefore, in public laws). prepared, as the President determines, to take all necessary steps, including The important practical consid- the use of armed force, to assist any eration to be kept in mind in dis- member or protocol state of the South- tinguishing joint and concurrent east Asia Collective Defense Treaty re- resolutions, in the current usage, questing assistance in defense of its is that only the former must be freedom. submitted to the President for his Sec. 3. This resolution shall expire when the President shall determine approval before taking effect. A that the peace and security of the area concurrent resolution does not in- is reasonably assured by international volve an exercise of the legislative conditions created by action of the United Nations or otherwise, except 3. Procedure in the U.S. House of Rep- that it may be terminated earlier by resentatives (97th Cong.) Ch. 24 concurrent resolution of the Congress. § 1.3.

4801

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 5 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

power under article I of the Con- which the concurrence of the Senate stitution in which the President and House of Representatives may be necessary.’’ must participate. The following The Constitution prescribes no defi- language is found in article I, sec- nite form in which legislation shall be tion 7, clause 3, of the Constitu- framed. The manner by which the leg- tion: islative will may be expressed seems to be left to the discretion of Congress, Every Order, Resolution, or Vote, to except that section 7 (article I) seems which the Concurrence of the Senate to imply that it is to be done by bill, as and House of Representatives may be it expressly provides that ‘‘every bill necessary (except on a question of Ad- which shall have passed the House of journment) shall be presented to the Representatives and the Senate shall, President of the United States; and be- before it becomes a law, be presented fore the Same shall take Effect, shall to the President of the United States’’ be approved by him. (subdivision 2); and it is also to be im- Since the passage of a concur- plied from the provisions of subdivision 3 (article 1, sec. 7) that it may be done rent resolution requires the con- by ‘‘order, resolution, or vote,’’ and in currence of both Houses, it is pos- that case it must be presented to the sible to argue, on the basis of this President as ‘‘in the case of a bill.’’ language, that a concurrent reso- . . . [N]o ‘‘order, resolution, or vote’’ lution also requires submission to need be presented to the President unless its subject-matter is legislation to the President for his approval. which the Constitution expressly re- However, the Congress has never quires in the first instance the assent accepted this literal interpreta- of both Houses, matter to which such tion. In 1897 the Committee on assent is constitutionally necessary. In the Judiciary of the Senate issued other words, the phrase ‘‘to which the concurrence . . . may be necessary’’ a report on the nature of the con- should be held to refer to the ‘‘concur- current resolution.(4) The com- rence’’ made ‘‘necessary’’ by the other mittee found that: provisions of the Constitution and not to the mere form of the procedure; so . . . [T]he Constitution looks beyond that no mere resolution, joint, concur- the mere form of a resolution in deter- rent, or otherwise, need be presented mining whether it should be presented to the President for his approval un- to the President, and looks rather to less it relates to matter of legislation the subject-matter of the resolution to which the Constitution requires the itself to ascertain whether it is one ‘‘to concurrence of both Houses of Con- gress and the approval of the Presi- 4. Senate Committee on the Judiciary, dent—in other words, unless such Con- Inquiry in Regard to River and Har- gressional action be the exercise of bor Act, S. Rept. No. 1335, 54th ‘‘legislative powers’’ vested in Congress Cong. 2d Sess. (1897); 4 Hinds’ under the provisions of section 1, arti- Precedents § 3483. cle I.

4802

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 5

Use of Concurrent Resolution On the subject of concurrent resolutions, the committee report may be § 5.1 Concurrent resolutions summarized as follows: Concurrent are not used in practice to resolutions, except in a few early instances in which the resolution was enact legislation; but if they neither designated as concurrent or are so used, the approval of joint, have not been used for the pur- the President would be re- poses of enacting legislation but to ex- quired. press the sense of Congress upon a given subject, to adjourn longer than 3 On July 19, 1945,(5) the following days, to make, amend, or suspend joint memorandum was prepared and inserted rules, and to accomplish similar pur- in the Record by Senator Abe Murdock, poses, in which both Houses have a of Utah: common interest, but with which the President has no concern. They have MEMORANDUM ON CONCURRENT never embraced legislative provisions RESOLUTIONS proper, and hence have never been Article I, section 7, subdivision 3 of deemed to require Executive approval. the Constitution of the United States While resolutions, other than joint res- provides: olutions, may conceivably embrace leg- ‘‘Every order, resolution, or vote, to islation, if they do so they require the approval of the President. But Revised which the concurrence of the Senate Statutes, Second Edition, 1878, page 2, and the House of Representatives may sections 7 and 8, prescribe the form of be necessary (except on a question of bills and joint resolutions, and it may adjournment) shall be presented to the properly be inferred that Congress did President of the United States.’’ not intend or contemplate that any leg- While this constitutional provision islation should thereafter be enacted would seem literally to require that except by bill or joint resolution. That every concurrent resolution be sub- is a fair inference, because Congress mitted to the President, the Senate provided no form for legislation by con- Committee on the Judiciary has indi- curring resolution. Moreover, the rules cated that a somewhat more liberal of the respective Houses treat bills and reading of the constitutional provision joint resolutions alike, and do not con- may be warranted. Senate Report No. template that legislation shall be en- 1335, Fifty-fourth Congress, second acted in any other form or manner. session, was submitted pursuant to a In substance, it was the conclusion resolution of the Senate which directed of the committee that concurrent reso- the Judiciary Committee to inquire, lutions were, as a matter of congres- among other things, as to whether con- sional practice, never used to enact leg- current resolutions generally are re- islation, but that if they were so used quired to be submitted to the President the approval of the President would be of the United States. required. The committee report con- cludes that— 5. 91 CONG. REC. 7809, 7810, 79th ‘‘Whether concurrent resolutions are Cong. 1st Sess. required to be submitted to the Presi-

4803

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 5 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

dent of the United States’’ must de- tion is without force and effect beyond pend not upon their mere form but the confines of the Capitol.’’ In addi- upon the fact whether they contain tion, in section 1084, Cannon states matter which is properly to be re- that on June 1, 1920, the Senate was garded as legislative in its character considering the concurrent resolution and effect. If they do, they must be respectfully declining to grant to the presented for his approval; otherwise, Executive the power to accept a man- they need not be. In other words, we date over Armenia, as requested in the hold that the clause in the Constitu- message of the President, when Mr. tion which declares that every order, Hitchcock, of Nebraska, offered an resolution, or vote must be presented amendment empowering the President to the President, to ‘‘which the concur- to appoint American members of a rence of the Senate and House of Rep- joint commission to supervise certain resentatives may be necessary,’’ refers fiscal relations of Armenia. Mr. Henry to the necessity occasioned by the re- Cabot Lodge, of Massachusetts, pre- quirement of the other provisions of sented a point of order to the effect the Constitution whereby every exer- that this was a concurrent resolution, cise of ‘‘legislative power’’ involves the that concurrent resolutions did not go concurrence of the two Houses; and to the President, but that since the every resolution not so requiring two proposed amendment was legislation concurrent actions, to wit, not involv- requiring the assent of the President it ing the exercise of legislative powers, would not be in order on a resolution need not be presented to the President. which does not go to the President. In brief, the nature or substance of the Thomas R. Marshall, Vice President of resolution, and not its form, controls the United States, said that so far as the question of its disposition.’’ he was aware there was no opinion of Cannon’s Precedents of the House of the Supreme Court to the effect that a Representatives, volume VII, section concurrent resolution need not go to 1045, states that a ‘‘concurrent resolu- the President, and consequently over- tion’’ is not used in conveying title to ruled the point of order which had Government property. His authority been made against it. for this statement is that on January In response to an inquiry from the 15, 1923, a concurrent resolution de- Secretary of the Interior. Attorney clining a devise of land to be used as General Caleb Cushing, on August 23, a national park was considered and 1854, rendered an opinion in which he agreed to with the following amend- held that a declaratory resolution of ei- ment: ther House of Congress is not obliga- Insert: ‘‘Resolved by the Senate and tory against the judgment of the Exec- the House of Representatives of the utive. He characterized the contrary United States of America in Congress view as follows: assembled’’ in lieu of ‘‘the Senate (the ‘‘According to the letter of the Con- House of Representatives concurring).’’ stitution, resolutions of the two (64 Congressional Record 1773.) Houses, even a joint resolution, when In section 1037 of volume VII, Can- submitted to the President and dis- non states that ‘‘a concurrent resolu- approved by him, do not acquire the

4804

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 5

force of law until passed anew by a the Attorney General stated (idem, p. concurrent vote of two-thirds of each 694): House. On the present hypothesis, the ‘‘A mere vote of either or of both better way would be not to present the Houses of Congress, declaring its opin- resolution to the President at all, and ion of the proper construction of a gen- then to call on him to accept it as law, eral law, has, be it repeated, in itself, with closed eyes, and, however against no constitutional force or obligation as law he may know it to be, yet to exe- law. It is opinion merely, and to be cute it out of deference to the assumed dealt with as such, receiving more or opinion of Congress. less of deference, like other mere opin- ‘‘In the second place, the hypothesis ions, according to the circumstances.’’ puts an end to all the forms of legislative scrutiny on the part of Congress. Establishing Joint Committees A declaratory law, especially if it involve the expenditure of the public § 5.2 The House adopted a con- treasure, has forms of legislation to go through to insure due consideration. current resolution, estab- All these time-honored means of secur- lishing a Joint Committee on ing right legislation will pass into des- the Organization of the Con- uetude, if the simple acceptance of a gress, reported by the House resolution, reported by a committee, is Committee on Rules. to be received as a constitutional en- ( ) actment, obligatory on all concerned, On Mar. 3, 1965, 6 the Com- including the Executive. mittee on Rules of the House of ‘‘In this way, instead of the revenues Representatives reported the fol- of the Government being subject only lowing privileged resolution (H. to the disposition of Congress in the Con. Res. 4): form of a law constitutionally enacted, they will be transferred to the control Resolved by the House of Representa- of an accidential majority, expressing tives (the Senate concurring), That its will by a resolution, passed, it may there is hereby established a Joint be, out of time, and under cir- Committee on the Organization of the cumstances, in which a law, duly and Congress (hereinafter referred to as truly representing the will of Congress, the committee) to be composed of six could not have passed. And thus, all Members of the Senate (not more than those checks and guards against the three of whom shall be members of the inconsiderate appropriation of the pub- majority party) to be appointed by the lic treasure, so carefully devised by the President of the Senate, and six Mem- founders of the Government, will be bers of the House of Representatives struck out of the Constitution.’’ (6 Op. (not more than three of whom shall be Attorney General 694.) members of the majority party) to be With specific reference to the author- appointed by the Speaker of the House ity of Congress to declare by resolution, without presentation to the Presi- 6. 111 CONG. REC. 3995, 89th Cong. 1st dent, the meaning of an existing law, Sess.

4805

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 5 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

of Representatives. The committee § 5.3 The Joint Committee on shall select a chairman and a vice Hawaii was created by a con- chairman from among its members. No recommendation shall be made by the current resolution. committee except upon a majority vote On Aug. 21, 1937,(8) the House of the members representing each agreed to the following concurrent House, taken separately. resolution (S. Con. Res. 18): Sec. 2. The committee shall make a full and complete study of the organi- Resolved by the Senate (the House of zation and operation of the Congress of Representatives concurring), That there the United States and shall rec- is hereby created a joint congressional ommend improvements in such organi- committee to be known as the Joint zation and operation with a view to- Committee on Hawaii, which shall be ward strengthening the Congress, sim- composed of not to exceed 12 Members plifying its operations, improving its of the Senate, to be appointed by the relationship with other branches of the President of the Senate, and not to ex- United States Government, and ena- ceed 12 Members of the House of Rep- bling it better to meet its responsibil- resentatives and the Delegate from ities under the Constitution . . . Hawaii, to be appointed by the Speak- (d) The committee shall report from er of the House of Representatives. time to time to the Senate and the The committee shall select a chairman House of Representatives the results of from among its members. The com- its study, together with its rec- mittee shall cease to exist upon mak- ommendations, the first report being ing its report to Congress pursuant to made not later than one hundred and this resolution. twenty days after the effective date of Sec. 2. The committee is authorized this concurrent resolution. If the Sen- and directed to conduct a comprehen- ate, the House of Representatives, or sive investigation and study of the sub- both, are in recess or have adjourned, ject of statehood and of other subjects the report shall be made to the Sec- relating to the welfare of the Territory retary of the Senate or the Clerk of the of Hawaii. The committee shall report House of Representatives, or both, as to the Senate and to the House of Rep- the case may be. All reports and find- resentatives not later than January 15, ings of the committee shall, when re- 1938, the results of its investigation ceived, be referred to the Committee and study, together with its recon Rules and Administration of the Senate and the appropriate committees tion was similar to that employed in of the House.(7) the 79th Congress in setting up a joint committee to study a proposal 7. On Mar. 11, 1965 (Id. at pp. 4768– which resulted in the Legislative Re- 80) following the passage of H. Con. organization Act of 1946. See H. Res. 4, S. Con. Res. 2 (an identical Con. Res. 18, 79th Cong., H. Jour. resolution) was taken from the pp. 80, 137, 79th Cong. 1st Sess. Speaker’s table and agreed to. The 8. 81 CONG. REC. 9624, 75th Cong. 1st language of this concurrent resolu- Sess.

4806

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 5

ommendations for such legislation as it sary of the death of General deems necessary or desirable. Lafayette. Sec. 3. For the purpose of this reso- (10) lution, the committee is authorized to On Feb. 2, 1934, the House sit and act, as a whole or by sub- considered and passed the fol- committee, at such times and places as lowing concurrent resoluton (H. it deems advisable, to hold such hear- Con. Res. 26): ings, to administer such oaths and af- Resolved by the House of Representa- firmations, to take such testimony, and tives (the Senate concurring), That to have such printing and binding done there is hereby established a special as it deems necessary. joint congressional committee to be composed of five members of the Sen- § 5.4 A concurrent resolution ate to be appointed by the President of is used to provide for the ap- the Senate and five members of the House of Representatives, to be appointment of a joint com- pointed by the Speaker of the House of mittee for the inauguration Representatives, which shall make ap- of the President-elect. propriate arrangements for the commemoration of the one-hundredth an- ( ) On May 5, 1948, 9 the House niversary of the death of General La- considered and agreed to the fol- fayette, occurring on May 20, 1934. lowing concurrent resolution (S. Con. Res. 48): Authorizing Hearings Resolved by the Senate (the House of § 5.6 The Joint Committee on Representatives concurring), That a Washington Metropolitan joint committee consisting of three Problems was authorized, by Senators and three Representatives, to be appointed by the President pro tem- concurrent resolution, to pore of the Senate and the Speaker of hold hearings and report to the House of Representatives, respec- the Committee on the Dis- tively, is authorized to make the nec- trict of Columbia of the Sen- essary arrangements for the inaugura- ate and House on two bills tion of the President-elect of the United States on the 20th day of Janu- ‘‘to aid in the development of ary 1949. an integrated system of transportation for the Na- § 5.5 A concurrent resolution tional Capital region.’’ provided for the appoint- On Apr. 21, 1960,(11) the House ment of a joint committee to considered and agreed to the fol- formulate plans for the commemoration of the anniver- 10. 78 CONG. REC. 1889, 73d Cong. 2d Sess. 9. 94 CONG. REC. 5321, 80th Cong. 2d 11. 106 CONG. REC. 8546, 86th Cong. 2d Sess. Sess.

4807

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 5 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

lowing concurrent resolution (S. of the Congress, established by Senate Con. Res. 101) from consideration Concurrent Resolution 2, Eighty-ninth Congress, agreed to March 11, 1965, is of which the Rules Committee had hereby authorized, from February 1, been discharged: 1966, through December 31, 1966, to Resolved by the Senate (the House of expend not to exceed $140,000 from Representatives concurring), That the the contingent fund of the Senate upon Joint Committee on Washington Met- vouchers approved by the chairman of ropolitan Problems, created by House the joint committee. Concurrent Resolution 172, agreed to August 29, 1957 [and extended by S. Adjournments Con. Res. 2 in the 86th Congress], is hereby authorized to hold public hear- § 5.8 The House agreed to a ings on the bills S. 3193 and H.R. Senate concurrent resolution 11135, and to furnish transcripts of providing for sine die ad- such hearings, and make such rec- journment of Congress. ommendations as it sees fit, to the Committees on the District of Colum- On Nov. 21, 1929,(13) the House bia of the Senate and House of Rep- considered and agreed to the fol- resentatives, respectively. lowing privileged Senate concurrent resolution (S. Con. Res. 19): Additional Committee Funds Resolved by the Senate (the House of § 5.7 The House agreed to a Representatives concurring), That the concurrent resolution pro- President of the Senate and the Speak- er of the House of Representatives be viding additional funds for authorized to close the present session the Joint Committee on the of the Congress by adjourning their re- Organization of the Con- spective Houses on Friday, November gress. 22, 1929, at the following hours, namely: the Senate at the hour of 10 o’clock (12) On Jan. 27, 1966, the House p.m., and the House at such hour as it agreed to the following concurrent may by order provide. resolution (S. Con. Res. 69) which had been called up for consider- § 5.9 The House passed a con- ation pursuant to a unanimous- current resolution providing consent request by Mr. Ray J. for adjournment sine die and Madden, of Indiana: giving the consent of the Resolved by the Senate (the House of House to an adjournment Representatives concurring), That the sine die of the Senate at any Joint Committee on the Organization time prior to Dec. 25, 1954.

12. 112 CONG. REC. 1341, 89th Cong. 2d 13. 71 CONG. REC. 5916, 71st Cong. 1st Sess. Sess.

4808

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 5

On Aug. 20, 1954,(14) the House viding that the House ad- considered and agreed to a Senate journ from July 21 to Oct. 8, amendment to a concurrent reso- 1945, and consenting to a lution (H. Con. Res. 266): Senate adjournment during Strike out all after the enacting the month of August or Sep- clause and insert ‘‘That the House of tember until Oct. 8, 1945; the Representatives shall adjourn on Au- resolution also made provi- gust 20, 1954, and that when it ad- sion for the earlier reassem- journs on said day, it stand adjourned sine die. bling of the two Houses by ‘‘Resolved further, That the consent the leadership if legislative of the House of Representatives is expediency should so war- hereby given to an adjournment sine rant. die of the Senate at any time prior to (16) December 25, 1954, when the Senate On July 18, 1945, the House shall so determine; and that the Sen- considered and agreed to the fol- ate, in the meantime may adjourn or lowing concurrent resolution (H. recess for such periods in excess of 3 Con. Res. 68): days as it may determine.’’ Resolved by the House of Representa- § 5.10 Adjournments of more tives (the Senate concurring), That when the House adjourns on Saturday, than three days have been ef- July 21, 1945, it stand adjourned until fected pursuant to concur- 12 o’clock meridian on Monday, Octo- rent resolution. ber 8, 1945, or until 12 o’clock merid- (15) ian on the third day after Members are On June 22, 1940, the House notified to reassemble in accordance adopted the following privileged with section 3 of this concurrent reso- concurrent resolution (H. Con. lution, whichever occurs first. Res. 83): Sec. 2. That the consent of the House of Representatives is hereby given to Resolved by the House of Representa- an adjournment of the Senate at any tives (the Senate concurring), That time during the month of August or when the two Houses adjourn on Sat- September, 1945, until 12 o’clock me- urday, June 22, 1940, they stand ad- ridian on Monday, October 8, 1945, or journed until 12 o’clock meridian, Mon- until 12 o’clock meridian on the third day, July 21, 1940. day after Members are notified to reassemble in accordance with section 3 of § 5.11 The House adopted a this concurrent resolution, whichever concurrent resolution pro- occurs first. Sec. 3. The President pro tempore of 14. 100 CONG. REC. 15554, 83d Cong. 2d the Senate and the Speaker of the Sess. 15. 86 CONG. REC. 9085, 76th Cong. 3d 16. 91 CONG. REC. 7733, 7734, 79th Sess. Cong. 1st Sess.

4809

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 5 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

House of Representatives shall notify ruled it out of order because it the Members of the Senate and the amended language in the resolu- House, respectively, to reassemble whenever in their opinion legislative tion to which both Houses had al- expediency shall warrant it or when- ready agreed. The Speaker then ever the majority leader of the Senate indicated that the proposed and the majority leader of the House, change could be effected by con- acting jointly, or the minority leader of current resolution: (19) the Senate and the minority leader of the House, acting jointly, file a written MR. [CLAUDE A.] FULLER [of Arkan- request with the Secretary of the Sen- sas]: Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary in- ate and the Clerk of the House that quiry. the Congress reassemble for the con- THE SPEAKER: The gentleman will sideration of legislation. state it. MR. FULLER: Cannot that be amend- Changing Text Agreed to by ed by unanimous consent? Both Houses THE SPEAKER: The only way under the rules of the House by which this § 5.12 Changes in the text of a situation could be changed would be by joint resolution agreed to by a concurrent resolution, agreed to by the two Houses (but not yet both Houses, changing the text of the matter already passed upon by the sent to the President) may be House and accepted by the Senate. made by concurrent resolution, called up by unanimous § 5.13 Items in an appropria- consent, which directs the tion bill which were not in Clerk to make corrections in disagreement between the the enrollment of the joint two Houses, and hence not resolution. committed to the conferees, On Feb. 1, 1937,(17) the House were changed through adop- was considering a Senate amend- tion of a concurrent resolu- ment to a joint resolution (H.J. tion called up unanimous Res. 81) creating a Joint Com- consent. mittee on Government Organiza- On July 23, 1962,(20) the House tion which had passed both the adopted a concurrent resolution House and the Senate. Mr. John (H. Con. Res. 505) ordering the E. Rankin, of Mississippi, offered an amendment to the Senate 19. See 7 Cannon’s Precedents §§ 1041, amendment, but the Speaker (18) 1042 for instances in which concurrent resolutions were used to amend 17. 81 CONG. REC. 646–48, 75th Cong. bills agreed to by both Houses. 1st Sess. 20. 108 CONG. REC. 14400, 14403, 87th 18. William B. Bankhead (Ala.). Cong. 2d Sess.

4810

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 5

Clerk of the House to make cer- further reading of the resolution be tain changes in the enrollment of dispensed with. I shall attempt to ex- a bill (H.R. 11038) making supple- plain what it is. (22) mental appropriations for the fis- THE SPEAKER: Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from cal year 1962. Mr. Albert Thomas, Texas? of Texas, asked unanimous con- There was no objection. sent that further reading of the MR. THOMAS: Mr. Speaker, it will be resolution be dispensed with so recalled this deals with what we call that he could explain the purpose the second supplemental appropriation of the resolution. The proceedings bill for 1962. When the supplemental were as follows: left the House it had 55 items carrying about $447 million, which was a reduc- SECOND SUPPLEMENTAL tion, in round figures, of $100 million APPROPRIATION BILL, 1962 under the budget, a reduction of about 20 percent. MR. THOMAS: Mr. Speaker, pursuant to the unanimous agreement of last It went to the other body and that Friday,(21) I call up for consideration a body added some 29 items, increasing House concurrent resolution. the amount over the House by $112 million, which made a round figure of The Clerk read as follows: about $560 million. H. Con. Res. 505 We bring to you two items, one a concurrent resolution and the other a Resolved by the House of Rep- resentatives (the Senate concurring), conference report. First, why the con- That the Clerk of the House of Rep- current resolution? We put in the con- resentatives be authorized and di- current resolution some 29 items rected in the enrollment of the bill which were originally in the supple- H.R. 11038 to make the following mental, but those 29 items are a reduc- changes in the engrossed House bill: tion—follow me now—below the figure (1) Page 2, strike out lines 13 to 16 inclusive. . . . that was in the supplemental when it (28) Page 14, strike out lines 4 to left the House and the figure when it 7, inclusive. left the Senate. (29) Page 14, strike out lines 17 to It is a complete reduction and a 21, inclusive. change. It is in the concurrent resolu- MR. THOMAS (interrupting reading of tion because it could not be in the con- the House concurrent resolution): Mr. ference report, and the reason it could Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that not be in the conference report is because it is a reduction in those 21. See 108 CONG. REC. 14364, 87th amounts. . . . Cong. 2d Sess., July 20, 1962, for the The previous question was ordered. unanimous-consent request ‘‘to con- THE SPEAKER: The question is on the sider on Monday next a concurrent resolution. resolution in connection with . . . H.R. 11038.’’ 22. Sam Rayburn (Tex.).

4811

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 5 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

The concurrent resolution was Rescinding Resolution of Ad- ( ) agreed to. 1 journment Rescinding Passage of Bill § 5.15 A concurrent resolution was submitted proposing to § 5.14 The House agreed to a rescind a concurrent resolu- concurrent resolution re- tion adjourning the House to scinding the action of the a day certain. two Houses in connection with the passage of a private On Aug. 23, 1951,(3) Mr. John bill and providing that the E. Rankin, of Mississippi, offered bill be postponed indefi- a resolution (H. Con. Res. 152): nitely. Resolved by the House of Representa- On Feb. 7, 1952,(2) the House by tives (the Senate concurring), That unanimous consent considered House Concurrent Resolution 151, and agreed to the following con- Eighty-second Congress, is hereby repealed. current resolution (S. Con. Res. 88): Mr. J. Percy Priest, of Ten- nessee, then interjected a motion Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring), That the that the House adjourn, and that action of the two Houses in connection motion was considered and agreed with the passage of the bill (S. 1236) to (the motion to adjourn taking for the relief of Kim Song Nore be re- precedence over a concurrent reso- scinded, and that the said bill be post- lution proposing to rescind a con- poned indefinitely. current resolution adjourning the 1. Parliamentarian’s Note: The second House to a day certain). There- supplemental appropriation bill, upon the House adjourned until H.R. 11038, was passed by the Sept. 12, 1951, in accordance with House on Mar. 30, and by the Sen- the terms of House Concurrent ate, amended, on Apr. 6, 1962. The conference report was not filed until Resolution 151. July 20. Since fiscal year 1962 expired on June 30, there was no Authorization to Conference longer a need for some of the funds Managers carried in the bill when it passed the two Houses. To eliminate the sums § 5.16 By concurrent resolu- no longer required, but not in dis- tion, the managers of a con- agreement, the concurrent resolution ference may be authorized to was agreed to. 2. 98 CONG. REC. 934, 82d Cong. 2d 3. 97 CONG. REC. 10586, 82d Cong. 1st Sess. Sess.

4812

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 5

consider amendments inad- amending a conference re- vertently omitted from the port that had been agreed to official papers. by the two Houses. On July 20, 1956,(4) Mr. Clair On Feb. 27, 1931,(5) the House Engle, of California, asked unani- by unanimous consent considered mous consent for the immediate and agreed to the following con- consideration of the concurrent current resolution (H. Con. Res. 52): resolution (S. Con. Res. 86) authorizing the conferees on H.R. Resolved by the House of Representa- tives (the Senate concurring), That the 1774, abolishing the Verendrye report of the Committee of Conference National Monument, North Da- on the disagreeing votes of the two kota, to consider certain Senate Houses on the bill of the House (H.R. 980) entitled ‘‘An Act to permit the amendments that were inadvert- United States to be made a party de- ently omitted from the official pa- fendant in certain cases,’’ heretofore pers and not originally disagreed agreed to by the two Houses be amended by adding at the end of the amend- to by the House. ment agreed to in the report the fol- The resolution was as follows: lowing new section: Resolved by the Senate (the House of Sec. 7. This act shall not apply to Representatives concurring), That the any lien of the United States held by it for its benefit under the Federal conferees on H.R. 1774, in addition to Reclamation laws. the Senate amendments already pending before them, be authorized to con- Rescinding Appointment of sider the following amendments: ‘‘(3) Page 1, line 6, strike out all Conferees after ‘permits’ down to and including § 5.18 The House agreed to a ‘site’ in line 8. ‘‘(4) Page 1, strike out all after line concurrent resolution of the 8 over to and including line 5 on page Senate rescinding the action 2.’’ of the two Houses in appoint- There was no objection, and the ing conferees and providing concurrent resolution was agreed for the return of the bill to to. the Senate for further amendment. Amending Conference Report On May 20, 1940,(6) the House, by unanimous consent, agreed to § 5.17 The House agreed to a concurrent resolution 5. 74 CONG. REC. 6279, 6280, 71st Cong. 3d Sess. 4. 102 CONG. REC. 13724, 84th Cong. 6. 86 CONG. REC. 6463, 76th Cong. 3d 2d Sess. Sess.

4813

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 5 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

the following concurrent resolu- § 5.20 The House agreed to a tion (S. Con. Res. 47): concurrent resolution pro- Resolved by the Senate (the House of viding for a joint session of Representatives concurring), That the the two Houses to commemo- action of the two Houses, respectively, rate the 200th anniversary of with reference to the appointment of George Washington’s birth- conferees on the bill (H.R. 8438) mak- day. ing appropriations for the Navy De- partment and the naval service for the On Jan. 20, 1932,(9) the House, fiscal year ending June 30, 1941, and by unanimous consent, considered for other purposes, be, and it is hereby, and agreed to the following con- rescinded; and that the bill, with the current resolution (H. Con. Res. accompanying papers, be returned to the Senate. 12): Resolved by the House of Representa- Providing for Joint Session tives (the Senate concurring), That in commemoration of the two-hundredth § 5.19 A joint session to receive anniversary of the birth of George a communication from the Washington the two Houses of Con- President is provided for by gress shall assemble in the Hall of the House of Representatives at 11:30 concurrent resolution. o’clock a.m. on Monday, February 22, On Jan. 3, 1935,(7) the House 1932. considered and agreed to the fol- That the President of the United lowing concurrent resolution (H. States, as the Chairman of the United States Commission for the celebration Con. Res. 1): of the two-hundredth anniversary of Resolved by the House of Representa- the birth of George Washington, is tives (the Senate concurring), That the hereby invited to address the American two Houses of Congress assemble in people in the presence of the Congress the Hall of the House of Representa- in commemoration of the bicentennial tives on Friday, the 4th day of Janu- anniversary of the birth of the first ary, 1935, at 12:30 o’clock in the after- President of the United States. noon, for the purpose of receiving such That invitations to attend the cere- communications as the President of the mony be extended to members of the United States shall be pleased to make to them.(8) similar examples, see 113 CONG. REC. 34, 35, 90th Cong. 1st Sess, 7. 79 CONG. REC. 15, 74th Cong. 1st Jan. 10, 1967; 109 CONG. REC. 23, Sess. 88th Cong. 1st Sess., Jan. 9, 1963; 8. This is the customary form for the and 100 CONG. REC. 8, 83d Cong. 2d concurrent resolution convening a Sess., Jan. 6, 1954. joint session to hear the President’s 9. 75 CONG. REC. 2342, 72d Cong. 1st state of the Union message. For Sess.

4814

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 5

cabinet, the Chief Justice and associate ings. ‘Joint meeting’ is properly justices of the Supreme Court of the used to describe joint proceedings United States, the Diplomatic Corps (through the Secretary of State), the during recesses of the two Houses General of the Armies, the Chief of for purposes that are usually cere- Naval Operations, and the Major Gen- monial, while ‘‘joint session’’ refers eral Commandant of the Marine Corps, to actual sessions of both Houses and such other persons as the Joint that have some legislative pur- Committee on Arrangements shall deem proper. pose, or which are prescribed by law as the count of the electoral § 5.21 The House agreed to a vote (3 USC § 15). concurrent resolution providing for a joint session of § 5.22 A concurrent resolution the two Houses to receive a providing for a joint session message from the President; of the House and the Senate such session to commence to receive a message from immediately following the the President is privileged. joint session to count the On May 20, 1935 (11) Mr. Ed- electoral vote. ward T. Taylor, of Colorado, asked On Jan. 6, 1945,(10) the House for the immediate consideration of considered and agreed to the fol- a concurrent resolution (H. Con. lowing concurrent resolution (S. Res. 22) providing for a joint ses- Con. Res. 2): sion of the House and Senate to receive a message from the Presi- Resolved by the Senate (the House of dent. Representatives concurring), That the two Houses of Congress assemble in THE SPEAKER: (12) The question is on the Hall of the House of Representa- the resolution. tives on Saturday, the 6th of January MR. [THOMAS L.] BLANTON [of 1945, immediately following the count- Texas]: Mr. Speaker, reserving the ing of the electoral votes for President right to object, I wish to ask a ques- and Vice President, as provided for in tion. Senate Concurrent Resolution 1, for THE SPEAKER: The Chair is of the the purpose of receiving such commu- opinion that this is a privileged resolu- nications as the President of the tion. United States shall be pleased to make to them. § 5.23 The House agreed to a The terms ‘‘joint meeting’’ and concurrent resolution pro- ‘‘joint session’’ have distinct mean- 11. 79 CONG. REC. 7838, 74th Cong. 1st 10. 91 CONG. REC. 63, 79th Cong. 1st Sess. Sess. 12. Joseph W. Byrns (Tenn.).

4815

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 5 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

viding for a joint session of the President of the Senate, who shall the two Houses to count the thereupon announce the state of the electoral votes for President vote, which announcement shall be and Vice President. deemed a sufficient declaration of the persons, if any, elected President and ( ) On Jan. 5, 1937, 13 the House Vice President of the United States, considered and agreed to the fol- and, together with a list of the votes, lowing concurrent resolution (S. be entered on the Journals of the two Con. Res. 2): Houses. Resolved by the Senate (the House of § 5.24 The House agreed to a Representatives concurring), That the two Houses of Congress shall meet in concurrent resolution pro- the Hall of the House of Representa- viding for a joint session to tives on Wednesday, the 6th day of hear an address by the Presi- January 1937, at 1 o’clock p.m., pursu- dent of Brazil. ant to the requirements of the Con- ( ) stitution and laws relating to the elec- On May 9, 1949, 14 the House tion of President and Vice President of considered and agreed to the fol- the United States, and the President of lowing concurrent resolution (H. the Senate shall be their presiding offi- Con. Res. 59): cer; that two tellers shall be previously appointed by the President of the Sen- Resolved by the House of Representa- ate on the part of the Senate and two tives (the Senate concurring), That the by the Speaker on the part of the two Houses of Congress assemble in House of Representatives, to whom the Hall of the House of Representa- shall be handed, as they are opened by tives on Thursday, the 19th day of the President of the Senate, all the cer- May 1949, at 12:30 o’clock p.m., for the tificates and papers purporting to be purpose of hearing an address by His certificates of the electoral votes, which Excellency Eurico Gaspar Dutra, Presi- certificates and papers shall be opened, presented, and acted upon in the al- dent of the United States of Brazil. phabetical order of the States begin- Parliamentarian’s Note: This ning with the letter A; and said tellers, appears to have been a joint ses- having then read the same in the presence and hearing of the two Houses, sion, but most such occasions are shall make a list of the votes as they joint meetings which are arranged shall appear from the said certificates; informally by each House granting and the votes having been ascertained permission for a recess on the day and counted in the manner and accord- agreed upon without a concurrent ing to the rules by law provided, the result of the same shall be delivered to resolution being used.

13. 81 CONG. REC. 14, 75th Cong. 1st 14. 95 CONG. REC. 5909, 81st Cong. 1st Sess. Sess.

4816

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 5

Legislative Budget and agreed to the following concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. § 5.25 A legislative budget for a 60): fiscal year was established by concurrent resolution. Resolved by the House of Representa- tives (the Senate concurring), That the On Feb. 27, 1948,(15) the House Architect of the Capitol is hereby au- considered the following concur- thorized and directed to make avail- rent resolution (S. Con Res. 42) able a room, with facilities for prayer which had been made in order for and meditation, for the use of Mem- bers of the Senate and House of Rep- consideration by the adoption of resentatives. The Architect shall main- House Resolution 485: tain the prayer room for individual use Resolved by the Senate (the House of rather than assemblies and he shall Representatives concurring), That it is provide appropriate symbols of reli- the judgment of the Congress, based gious unity and freedom of worship. upon presently available information, that revenues during the period of the Attendance at Foreign Meeting fiscal year 1949 will approximate $47,300,000,000 and that expenditures § 5.27 A concurrent resolution during such fiscal year should not ex- provided for the acceptance ceed $37,200,000,000, of which latter of an invitation to attend a amount not more than $26,600,000,000 would be in consequence of appropria- meeting of the Empire Par- tions hereafter made available for obli- liamentary Association and gation in such fiscal year. for the appointment of certain Members to a delegation Providing Facilities for Prayer thereto. § 5.26 A concurrent resolution On June 22, 1943,(17) the House authorized the Architect of considered and agreed to the fol- the Capitol to make available lowing concurrent resolution (S. a room, with facilities for Con. Res. 14): prayer and meditation, for Resolved by the Senate (the House of the use of Members of the Representatives concurring), That the Senate and House. Senate and the House of Representa- tives hereby accept the invitation ten- (16) On July 17, 1953, the House, dered by the Speaker of the Senate of by unanimous consent, considered Canada and joint-president of the Em- pire Parliamentary Association, Do- 15. 94 CONG. REC. 1875–85, 80th Cong. minion of Canada branch, to have four 2d Sess. 16. 99 CONG. REC. 9073–76, 83d Cong. 17. 89 CONG. REC. 6268, 78th Cong. 1st 1st Sess. Sess.

4817

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 5 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

Members of the Senate and four Mem- current resolution (S. Con. Res. bers of the House of Representatives 59): attend a meeting to be held in Ottawa, Canada, during the period June 26 to Resolved by the Senate (the House of July 1, 1943, at which the Dominion of Representatives concurring), That the Canada Branch of the Empire Par- Congress hereby extends to the Honor- liamentary Association will be host to able Herbert Hoover, our only living a delegation from the United Kingdom ex-President, its cordial birthday greet- Parliament and probably to delegations ings on his seventy-fifth birthday, and from the legislative bodies of Australia, expresses its admiration and gratitude New Zealand, and Bermuda. The for his devoted service to his country President of the Senate and the Speak- and to the world; and that the Con- er of the House of Representatives are gress hereby expresses its hope that he authorized to appoint the Members of be spared for many more years of use- the Senate and the Members of the ful and honorable service; and be it House of Representatives, respectively, further to attend such meeting and are further Resolved, That the Secretary of the authorized to designate the chairmen Senate transmit a copy of this resolu- of the delegations from each of the tion to Mr. Hoover. Houses. The expenses incurred by the members of the delegations appointed § 5.29 By concurrent resolu- for the purpose of attending such meet- tion a day was set aside for ing, which shall not exceed $1,000 for appropriate exercises in each of the delegations, shall be reim- bursed to them from the contingent commemoration of the life, fund of the House of which they are character, and public service Members, upon the submission of of former President Franklin vouchers approved by the chairman of D. Roosevelt. the delegation of which they are mem- ( ) bers. On May 23, 1946, 19 the House, by unanimous consent, considered Honoring Former Presidents the following concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 152): § 5.28 A concurrent resolution Resolved, That Monday, the 1st day may be used by the Congress of July 1946, be set aside as the day to extend birthday greetings upon which there shall be held a joint to a former President of the session of the Senate and the House of United States. Representatives for appropriate exercises in commemoration of the life, (18) On Aug. 2, 1949, the House, character, and public service of the late by unanimous consent, considered Franklin D. Roosevelt, former Presi- and agreed to the following con- dent of the United States.

18. 95 CONG. REC. 10628, 81st Cong. 1st 19. 92 CONG. REC. 5559, 79th Cong. 2d Sess. Sess.

4818

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 5

That a joint committee, to consist of thanks and appreciation of the Con- three Senators and five Members of gress and the American people are the House of Representatives, to be ap- hereby tendered to General of the pointed by the President pro tempore Army Douglas MacArthur, in recogni- of the Senate and the Speaker of the tion of his outstanding devotion to the House of Representatives, respectively, American people, his brilliant leader- shall be named, with full power to make all arrangements and publish a ship during and following World War suitable program for the joint session II, and the unsurpassed affection held of Congress herein authorized, and to for him by the people of the Republic of issue the invitations hereinafter men- the Philippines which has done so tioned. much to strengthen the ties of friend- That invitations shall be extended to ship between the people of that nation the President of the United States, the and the people of the United States.(1) members of the Cabinet, the Chief Jus- tice and Associate Justices of the Su- § 5.31 The House agreed to a preme Court of the United States, and concurrent resolution au- such other invitations shall be issued as to the said committee shall seem thorizing the use of the ro- best. tunda of the Capitol for That all expenses incurred by the lying-in-state ceremonies for committee in the execution of the pro- the body of General of the visions of this resolution shall be paid, one-half from the contingent fund of Army Douglas MacArthur. the Senate and one-half from the con- On Apr. 6, 1964,(2) the House, tingent fund of the House of Rep- resentatives. by unanimous consent, considered and agreed to the following con- Honoring Military Figures current resolution (S. Con. Res. 74): § 5.30 The House agreed to a concurrent resolution ten- Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring), That in dering the thanks of Con- recognition of the long and distin- gress to General of the Army guished service rendered by Douglas Douglas MacArthur. MacArthur, General of the Army of the On July 20, 1962,(20) the House, United States, the remains be per- by unanimous consent, considered 1. See also concurrent resolution com- and agreed to the following con- mending Lt. Col. John H. Glenn, current resolution (H. Con. Res. USMC, on successfully completing 347): the first United States manned or- Resolved by the House of Representa- bital space flight. 108 CONG. REC. tives (the Senate concurring), That the 2608, 87th Cong. 2d Sess., Feb. 20, 1962. 20. 108 CONG. REC. 14329, 14330, 87th 2. 110 CONG. REC. 6878, 88th Cong. 2d Cong. 2d Sess. Sess.

4819

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 5 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

mitted to lie in state in the rotunda of of Congress to the Finnish the Capitol from April 8 to April 9, Parliament on its 50th anni- 1964, and the Architect of the Capitol, under the direction and supervision of versary. the President pro tempore of the Sen- On Nov. 27, 1967,(4) the House ate and the Speaker of the House of considered and agreed to the fol- Representatives, shall take all nec- lowing concurrent resolution (S. essary steps for the accomplishment of that purpose. Con. Res. 49): Whereas the year 1967 marks the Honoring Foreign Govern- fiftieth anniversary of the independ- ments ence of Finland; and Whereas these fifty years have been § 5.32 The House agreed to a marked by close ties of friendship and concurrent resolution association between Finland and the amending a concurrent reso- United States: Now, therefore, be it Resolved by the Senate (the House of lution providing for a joint Representatives concurring), That the session in commemoration of Congress of the United States extends the 50th anniversary of the its congratulations and best wishes to liberation of Cuba. the Parliament of Finland on the occasion of the fiftieth anniversary of the (3) On Apr. 14, 1948, the House independence of Finland and in affir- considered and agreed to the fol- mation of the affection and friendship lowing concurrent resolution (H. of the people of the United States for Con. Res. 184): the people of Finland.(5) Resolved by the House of Representa- tives (the Senate concurring), That the Honoring Royalty first paragraph of House Concurrent Resolution 139, Eightieth Congress, is § 5.34 The House agreed to a hereby amended to read as follows: concurrent resolution to as- ‘‘That in commemoration of the fif- semble the House and the tieth anniversary of the liberation of Senate in the rotunda to wel- Cuba, the two Houses of Congress shall assemble in the Hall of the House 4. 113 CONG. REC. 33762, 33763, 90th of Representatives at 12 o’clock merid- Cong. 1st Sess. ian, on Monday, April 19, 1948.’’ 5. Parliamentarian’s Note: The concurrent resolution was enrolled on § 5.33 The House agreed to a parchment, signed by the Speaker concurrent resolution ex- and the Vice President, and trans- tending the congratulations mitted to the Secretary of State. The Secretary in turn saw to it that the 3. 94 CONG. REC. 4437, 80th Cong. 2d resolution was included in the next Sess. diplomatic pouch to Finland.

4820

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 6

come the King and Queen of § 6. Simple Resolutions Great Britain and appointing a joint committee to make Cross References necessary arrangements. Simple Resolutions as related to House- On May 23, 1939,(6) the House, Senate Conferences, Ch. 33, infra. Simple Resolutions as related to privi- by unanimous consent, considered leges of the House or a Member, Ch. and agreed to the following con- 11, supra. current resolution (S. Con. Res. Simple resolutions and special orders, 17): Ch. 21, supra. Resolved by the Senate (the House of f Representatives concurring). That the two Houses of Congress shall assemble Use of Simple Resolution in their respective Houses on Friday, June 9, 1939, at 10:30 o’clock ante- § 6.1 Simple resolutions are meridian, and thereafter, in recess, the used in dealing with non- Members of each House shall proceed legislative matters such as informally to the rotunda of the Cap- expressing opinions or facts, itol at 11 o’clock antemeridian, for the creating and appointing com- purpose of welcoming Their Majesties mittees, calling on depart- the King and Queen of Great Britain, and the members of their party, on the ments for information, re- occasion of their visit to the Capitol, ports, and the like. Except as and at the conclusion of such cere- specifically provided by law, monies the two Houses shall reassem- they have no legal effect, and ble in their respective Chambers. require no action by the That a joint committee consisting of other House. Containing no three Members of the Senate, to be ap- legislative provisions, they pointed by the President of the Senate, and three Members of the House of are not presented to the Representatives, to be appointed by President of the United the Speaker of the House, is hereby States for his approval, as in authorized to make the necessary ar- the case of bills and joint res- rangements for carrying out the pur- olution. pose of this concurrent resolution.(7) On Oct. 29, 1943,(8) during con- 6. 84 CONG. REC. 6032, 76th Cong. 1st sideration in the Senate of a Sen- Sess. ate resolution (S. Res. 192) declar- 7. See also S. Con. Res. 20, 84 CONG. REC. 7151, 76th Cong. 1st Sess., and Queen of Great Britain in the June 19, 1939, authorizing expenses rotunda of the Capitol. from the contingent funds of the two 8. 89 CONG. REC. 8901, 8902, 78th Houses for the reception of the King Cong. 1st Sess.

4821

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 6 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

ing certain aims of the United tary inquiry; neither were the two pre- States abroad, the following dis- ceding questions parliamentary inquir- cussion took place: ies. They both involve legal questions, and are not properly parliamentary MR. [JOHN A.] DANAHER [of Con- questions to be decided by the Chair. necticut]: Under the precedents of the THE PRESIDING OFFICER: The Sen- Senate, does a Senate resolution have ator from Missouri is certainly late legislative effect? with the point of order so far as the THE PRESIDING OFFICER: (9) The first two questions are concerned. With Chair understands the question to be, respect to the last question, the Chair Under the precedents of the Senate, will overrule the point of order and does a resolution of the kind now pend- permit the Senator from Connecticut ing before the Senate have legislative again to state his parliamentary in- effect? quiry. Mr. Danaher: Mr. President, MR. DANAHER: That is correct. does a Senate resolution, if adopted, THE PRESIDING OFFICER: In the opin- have greater effect than to reflect the ion of the present occupant of the views of the largest number of Sen- chair, the answer is ‘‘No.’’ ators agreeing thereto, who are present and voting for it? MR. DANAHER: Mr. President, a further parliamentary inquiry. THE PRESIDING OFFICER: The Chair will state that under the universal THE PRESIDING OFFICER: The Sen- practice a resolution of this kind is not ator will state it. binding on anyone. It is merely a state- MR. DANAHER: Is such a resolution, ment of the opinion of the Senate. if adopted, binding upon a succeeding MR. DANAHER: Mr. President, in re- Senate? sponse to the comment of the Senator HE PRESIDING OFFICER: In the opin- T from Montana, let me say that with ion of the present occupant of the very considerable diligence I made in- chair, the answer is the same as the quiry into the Senate precedents with answer to the previous question—‘‘Ab- reference to the status and effect of a solutely no.’’ Senate resolution of this character. I MR. DANAHER: Mr. President, a fur- have taken the matter up with the ther parliamentary inquiry. parliamentarian of the Senate and THE PRESIDING OFFICER: THE SEN- with others in a position to give me the ATOR WILL STATE IT. benefit of their advice and experience. MR. DANAHER: Does a Senate resolu- I have been informed—and I think reli- tion, if adopted, have a greater effect ably—by the parliamentarian himself than to reflect the views of the largest that he has made a search of the number of Senators agreeing thereto, precedents at my request. I respect- who are present and voting for it? fully ask unanimous consent to have MR. [JOEL BENNETT] CLARK OF Mis- inserted in the Record at this point as souri: Mr. President, I make the point a part of my remarks a definition of of order that that is not a parliamen- the effect of a Senate resolution, as prepared for me by the Senate parlia- 9. Scott W. Lucas (Ill.). mentarian.

4822

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 6

MR. [CARL A.] HATCH [of New Mex- On Jan. 3, 1935,(10) the House ico]: Mr. President, will the Senator considered and agreed to the fol- yield? lowing House resolution (H. Res. MR. DANAHER: I yield. 17): MR. HATCH: Does not the Senator intend to read it, or have it read? Resolved, That the rules of the Sev- MR. DANAHER: Yes. I ask that the enty-third Congress be, and they are memorandum be read at the desk. hereby, adopted as the rules of the Seventy-fourth Congress, including THE PRESIDING OFFICER: Without objection, the clerk will read the memo- therein the following amendment, to wit: randum. That the last sentence of the first The legislative clerk read as follows: paragraph of section 4 of rule XXVII be Under the uniform practice of this amended to read as follows: body, Senate (or simple) resolutions ‘‘When a majority of the total Mem- are used in dealing with non- bership of the House shall have signed legislative matters exclusively within the jurisdiction of the Senate, such the motion, it shall be entered on the as expressing opinions or facts, cre- Journal, printed with the signatures ating and appointing committees of thereto in the Congressional Record, the body, calling on departments for and referred to the Calendar of Mo- information, reports, etc. They have tions to Discharge Committees.’’ no legal effect, their passage being attested only by the Secretary of the Senate, and require no action by the Waiver of Rules House of Representatives. Con- taining no legislative provisions, § 6.3 The Committee on Rules they are not presented to the Presi- may report and call up as dent of the United States for his approval, as in the case of bills and privileged resolutions tempo- joint resolutions. rarily waiving any rule of the Parliamentarian’s Note: As in House, including statutory the case of concurrent resolutions, provisions enacted as an ex- Congress has in recent years en- ercise in the House’s rule- acted legislation permitting either making authority which House by simple resolution to ap- would otherwise prohibit the prove or disapprove certain pro- consideration of a bill being posed executive actions. See Sec. made in order by the resolu- 7, infra. [See also House Rules tion. and Manual § 1013 (1981).] The following proceedings took place on Mar. 20, 1975: (11) Adoption of Rules 10. 79 CONG. REC. 13, 74th Cong. 1st § 6.2 A simple resolution is Sess. used to adopt the rules of the 11. 121 CONG. REC. 7676, 7677, 94th House for each Congress. Cong. 1st Sess. 4823

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 6 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

MR. [CLAUDE D.] PEPPER [of Florida]: tion 402. Section 402 makes a similar Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Com- provision for waiving its provisions in mittee on Rules, I call up House Reso- the Senate. lution 337 and ask for its immediate Second, section 904 of the Budget consideration. Act, in subsections (b) and (c) states The Clerk read the resolution as fol- that any provision of title III or IV lows: may be waived or suspended in the Senate by a majority vote of the Mem- H. RES. 337 bers voting, thus extending a waiver Resolved, That upon the adoption procedure in the Senate to section 401 of this resolution it shall be in order as well as 402. But section 904 con- to move, clause 2(l)(6) of rule XI and tains no similar waiver provision for section 401 of Public Law 93–344 to the House of Representatives. the contrary notwithstanding, that the House resolve itself into the It should be clear from these two Committee of the Whole House on facts that the House was intentionally the State of the Union for the consid- excluded from waiving the provisions eration of the bill (H.R. 4485) to pro- of section 401 of the Budget Act. vide for greater homeownership op- Mr. Speaker, the point may be made portunities for middle-income fami- lies and to encourage more efficient that the Budget Act’s provisions are use of land and energy re- part of the rules of the House, and, as sources. . . . such, are subject to change at any time under the constitutional right of the MR. [JOHN B.] ANDERSON of Illinois: House to determine the rules of its Mr. Speaker, I raise a point of order proceedings. But I think a fine distinc- against House Resolution 337 on the tion should be drawn here. This resolu- grounds that the Budget Act by direct tion is presented for the purpose of inference forbids any waiver of the sec- making a bill in order for consider- tion 401 ban on new backdoor spend- ation, and is not before us for the pur- ing in the House of Representatives. pose of amending or changing the Mr. Speaker, my point of order is Budget Act. Since section 401 of the grounded on two basic facts: First, Budget Act deals concurrently with the there is no specific provision in section House and the Senate and their inte- 401 for an emergency waiver of its pro- grated procedures for prohibiting new visions; and yet, in section 402, which backdoor spending, any attempt to generally prohibits consideration of alter this would have to be dealt with bills authorizing new budget authority in a concurrent resolution at the very after May 15, there is specific provision minimum, if not a joint resolution or for an ‘‘Emergency Waiver in the amendment to the Budget Act. It is House’’ if the Rules Committee deter- one thing for the House to amend its mines that emergency conditions re- rules; it is quite another for it to at- quire such a waiver. It is my conten- tempt, by simple resolution, to waive a tion that if the authors of section 401 provision of law relating to the joint had intended to permit a waiver of its rules of procedures of both provisions, they would have specifically Houses. . . . It is my contention that written into law as they did with sec- the authors of the Budget Act never in-

4824

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 6

tended for side-door spending in the waived, a constitutional basis and a Rules Committee and for that reason specific provision of clause 4 of rule XI specifically excluded any provision for granting the Committee on Rules a emergency waivers in section 401 in very broad authority to report matters the House. I therefore urge that my that relate to order of business. It is a point of order be sustained. well-known fact that the Committee on MR. [RICHARD] BOLLING (of Mis- Rules often reports waivers of points of souri): . . . Mr. Speaker, there are a order, and this is, in effect, a waiver of variety of grounds on which it would a point of order. be possible to address this point of THE SPEAKER: (12) The Chair is ready order. It could be dismissed very quick- to rule. ly on the grounds that the rules of the The gentleman from Illinois makes House provide that it shall always be the point of order against the consider- in order to call up for consideration a ation of House Resolution 337 reported report from the Committee on Rules on from the Committee on Rules, on the a rule, joint rule or the order of busi- grounds that that Committee has no ness, and then it proceeds to give the authority to report as privileged a reso- very limited number of exceptions. The lution waiving the provisions of section one that the gentleman from Illinois 401 of the Congressional Budget Act of makes as his points of order, and all 1974. Section 401 prohibits the consid- the different ones he makes as his eration in the House of any bill which points of order, are not included in provides new spending authority un- those specific exceptions. less that bill also provides that such new spending authority is to be avail- So, the rules of the House specifi- able only to the extent provided in ap- cally make it clear that the Rules Com- propriations acts. mittee is in order when it reports a rule dealing with the order of business, The Chair would point out that while section 401 has the force and ef- and it does not qualify that authority fect of law, section 904 of the Congres- except in a very limited degree. sional Budget Act clearly recites that Furthermore, it is an established all of the provisions of title IV, includ- fact that the House can always change ing section 401, were enacted as an ex- its rules. It is protected by so ercise of the rulemaking power of the doing. . . . House, to be considered as part of the MR. [CHALMERS P.] WYLIE [of Ohio]: rules of the House, with full recogni- Does not the Budget Control Act, section of the constitutional right of each tion 401(a) prohibit backdoor spend- House to change such rules at any ing? time to the same extent as in the case MR. BOLLING: It also is possible for of any other rule of the House. House that provision to be waived. What I Resolution 5, 94th Congress, adopted tried to do in my discussion in opposi- all these provisions of the Budget Act tion to the validity of the point of order as part of the rules of the House for made by the gentleman from Illinois this Congress. . . . was to point out the very broad basis on which such a matter could be 12. Carl Albert (Okla.).

4825

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 6 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

The Chair, therefore, overrules the Committee Investigations point of order. § 6.5 The Senate considered a Amending Rules resolution providing for the investigation by a Senate § 6.4 The House agreed to a committee of charges made resolution amending the in the press concerning the rules of the House to permit bribery of candidates for the Delegate from Alaska to public office. serve on an additional com- On Mar. 8, 1960,(14) there was mittee. considered in the Senate the fol- On Aug. 2, 1949,(13) the House, lowing resolution (S. Res. 285): by unanimous consent, considered Resolved, That the Committee on and agreed to the following reso- Rules and Administration, or any duly authorized subcommittee thereof, is lution (H. Res. 294): authorized and directed under sections 134(a) and 136 of the Legislative Reor- Resolved, That rule XII of the Stand- ganization Act of 1946, as amended, ing Rules of the House of Representa- and in accordance with its jurisdictions tives is hereby amended to read as fol- specified by rule XXV of the Standing lows: Rules of the Senate, to examine, investigate, and make a complete study of RULE XII the charges, with a view to determine the truth or falsity thereof, which have DELEGATES AND RESIDENT recently appeared in the public press COMMISSIONERS that certain persons have sought, 1. The Delegate from Hawaii and through corruptly offering various fa- the Resident Commissioner of the vors, privileges, and other inducements United States from Puerto Rico shall be elected to serve as additional (including large sums of money), to in- members on the Committees on Ag- duce certain individuals to lend their riculture, Armed Services, and Pub- political support to one political party lic Lands, and the Delegate from rather than to another, or to become Alaska shall be elected to serve as candidates of one political party rather an additional member on the Com- than of another, and that the offers mittees on Agriculture, Armed Serv- ices, Merchant Marine and Fisheries, made by such persons have in fact cor- and Public Lands; and they shall ruptly induced certain of such individ- possess in such committees the same uals to change their political affili- powers and privileges as in the ations or to lend their political support House, and may make any motion to one political party rather than to except to reconsider. another.

13. 95 CONG. REC. 10618, 81st Cong. 1st 14. 106 CONG. REC. 4899, 86th Cong. 2d Sess. Sess.

4826

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00054 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 6

Sec. 2. The committee shall report District grand jury to give testimony its findings, together with its rec- next Wednesday morning. The subpena ommendations for such legislation as it has just been read by the Clerk. Under deems advisable, to the Senate at the the precedents of the House, I find earliest practicable date, but not later that I am unable to comply with this than January 31, 1961. summons without the consent of the Sec. 3. For the purpose of this reso- House, the privilege of the House being lution, the committee, from the date on involved. I therefore submit the matter which this resolution is agreed to, to for the consideration of this body. January 31, 1961, inclusive, is author- Mr. John W. McCormack, of ized (1) to make such expenditures as it deems advisable, and (2) to employ Massachusetts, addressed the on a temporary basis technical, cler- House concerning the significance ical, and other assistants and consult- of the matter Mr. Fish had ants. brought to the attention of the House, and following his remarks, § 6.6 The House agreed to a included below, introduced, as a resolution directing a com- question of the privilege of the mittee to investigate whether House, House Resolution 335, a subpena issued by a court which the House then considered or grand jury purporting to and agreed to: command a Member to appear and testify invades the MR. MCCORMACK: Mr. Speaker, the rights and privileges of the gentleman from New York raises a fundamental question, which is very House. important to the House to have correct On Nov. 10, 1941,(15) Mr. Ham- information and advice upon before ilton Fish, of New York, rose to a proceeding. The matter concerns the question of personal privilege, and integrity of the House itself whether or not an individual Member can be sum- sent to the desk a subpena which moned under the circumstances dis- had been served on him, asking closed in the case of the gentleman that it be read by the Clerk. When from New York [Mr. Fish] and if he the subpena had been read, Mr. cannot, if he can waive his constitu- Fish submitted, as a matter of tional privileges as a Member. privilege of the House, the issue of This resolution does not pass upon compliance with the subpena. the merits or the demerits of the grand jury proceedings. In offering the reso- MR. FISH: Mr. Speaker,(16) I have lution I am about to offer, it is not a been summoned to appear before the question of reflection on the grand jury or the Department of Justice or the ju- 15. 87 CONG. REC. 8734, 77th Cong. 1st dicial branch of the Government, but it Sess. involves a question of the integrity of 16. Sam Rayburn (Tex.). the House.

4827

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00055 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 6 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

I offer the following resolution and sponding to the summons served (17) ask for its immediate consideration. upon him. The Clerk read as follows (H. Res. § 6.7 The House considered as 335): a question of privilege, a res- Whereas Hamilton Fish, a Mem- olution referring to the Com- ber of this House from the State of mittee on the Judiciary the New York, has been summoned to appear as a witness before the grand question of whether sub- jury of a United States Court for the penas served upon certain District of Columbia to testify; and Whereas the service of such a Members, former Members, process upon a Member of this and House employees in a House during his attendance while civil suit invaded the rights the Congress is in session might deprive the district which he rep- and privileges of the House. resents of this voice and vote; and On Mar. 26, 1953,(18) the House Whereas Article I, section 6, of the Constitution of the United States considered and agreed to the fol- provides: ‘‘They (the Senators and lowing resolution (H. Res. 190): Representatives) shall in all cases, except treason, felony, and breach of Whereas Harold H. Velde, of Illinois; the peace, be privileged from arrest Donald L. Jackson, of California; during their attendance at the ses- Francis E. Walter, of Pennsylvania; sion of their respective Houses, and Morgan M. Moulder, of Missouri; Clyde in going to and returning from the same . . . and for any speech or de- Doyle, of California; and James B. bate in either House, they (the Sen- Frazier, Jr., of Tennessee, all Rep- ators and Representatives) shall not resentatives in the Congress of the be questioned in any other place’’; United States; and Louis J. Russell and and William Wheeler, employees of the Whereas it appears by reason of House of Representatives, have been the action taken by the said grand jury that the rights and privileges of by subpenas commanded to appear on the House of Representatives may be Monday and Tuesday, March 30 and infringed: 31, 1953, in the city of Los Angeles, Resolved, That the Committee on Calif., and to testify and give their the Judiciary of the House of Rep- depositions in the case of Michael Wil- resentatives is authorized and di- son et al. v. Loew’s Incorporated et al., rected to investigate and consider whether the service of a subpena or any other process by a court or a 17. On Nov. 17, 1941, the Committee on grand jury purporting to command a the Judiciary, in relation to the Member of this House to appear and above matter, filed a privileged re- testify invades the rights and privi- port (H. Rept. 1415) which was re- leges of the House of Representa- ferred to the House Calendar. 87 tives. The committee shall report at any time on the matters herein com- CONG. REC. 8933, 77th Cong. 1st mitted to it, and that until the com- Sess. mittee shall report Representative 18. 99 CONG. REC. 2356–58, 83d Cong. Hamilton Fish shall refrain from re- 1st Sess.

4828

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00056 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 6

an action pending in the Superior in session might deprive the district Court of the State of California in and which each respectively represents of for the County of Los Angeles; and his voice and vote; and Whereas the complaint in the afore- Whereas the service of such sub- said case of Michael Wilson et al. v. penas and summons upon Members of Loew’s Incorporated et al., lists among the House of Representatives who are the parties defendant therein John S. members of the duly constituted com- Wood, Francis E. Walter, Morgan M. mittee of the House of Representatives, Moulder, Clyde Doyle, James B. and the service of such subpenas and Frazier, Harold E. Velde, Barnard W. summons upon employees of the House Kearney, Donald L. Jackson, Charles of Representatives serving on the staff E. Potter, Louis J. Russell, and Wil- of a duly constituted committee of the liam Wheeler; and . . . House of Representatives, will hamper Whereas part V of said complaint and delay if not completely obstruct the work of such committee, its mem- contains an allegation that ‘‘on and bers, and its staff employees in their prior to March 1951 and continuously official capacities; and thereafter defendants herein and each Whereas it appears by reason of alle- of them conspired together and agreed gations made in the compliant in the with each other to blacklist and to said case of Michael Wilson, et al. v. refuse employment to and exclude from Loew’s Incorporated, et al., and by rea- employment in the motion-picture in- son of the said processes hereinbefore dustry all employees and persons seek- mentioned the rights and privileges of ing employment in the motion-picture the House of Representatives may be industry who had been or thereafter infringed: were subpenaed as witnesses before Resolved, That the Committee on the the Committee on Un-American Activi- Judiciary, acting as a whole or by sub- ties of the House of Representatives committee, is hereby authorized and . . .’’; and directed to investigate and consider Whereas article I, section 6, of the whether the service of the processes Constitution of the United States pro- aforementioned purporting to com- vides: ‘‘They (the Senators and Rep- mand Members, former Members, and resentatives) shall in all cases, except employees of this House to appear and treason, felony, and breach of the testify invades the rights and privi- peace, be privileged from arrest during leges of the House of Representatives; their attendance at the session of their and whether in the complaint of the respective Houses, and in going to and aforementioned case of Michael Wilson, returning from the same; . . . and for et al. v. Loew’s Incorporated et al., the any speech or debate in either House, allegations that Members, former they (the Senators and Representa- Members, and employees of the House tives) shall not be questioned in any of Representatives acting in their offi- other place’’; and cial capacities as members of a com- Whereas the service of such process mittee of the said House conspired upon Members of this House during against the plaintiffs in such action to their attendance while the Congress is the detriment of such plaintiffs, and

4829

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 6 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

any and all other allegations in the certain alleged conduct, or activities, or said complaint reflecting upon Mem- operations, of the House Committee on bers, former Members, and employees Un-American Activities of the 82d Con- of this House and their actions in their gress. Enough has been included in the representative and official capacities, resolution, I think, to indicate the na- invade the rights and privileges of the ture of the suit which is, as I under- House of Representatives. The com- stand, one for damages asserted mittee may report at any time on the against certain corporations and pri- matters herein committed to it, and vate individuals, and likewise against until the committee shall report and Members of the House of Representa- the House shall grant its consent in tives and employees of the House of the premises the aforementioned Mem- Representatives, admittedly by the bers, former Members, and employees provisions of the complaint itself in- shall refrain from reponding to the volving them in the conduct of their of- subpenas or summons served upon ficial duty. them. . . . If you noted the reading of the reso- MR. [CHARLES A.] HALLECK [of Indi- lution it is clear that the privileges of ana]: Mr. Speaker, I think probably a the House are infringed by this action. few words in explanation of the resolu- The purpose of this resolution is to tion and the reason for its being here avoid the immediate effect of the ac- are in order at this time, in spite of the tion sought to be taken in California fact that the resolution for the most and at the same time to direct the Ju- part speaks for itself. diciary Committee of the House of Rep- By way of explanation, as most of us resentatives to make a thorough study know, certain members of the House and investigation of the whole matter Committee on Un-American Activities and report to the House of Representa- and employees of that committee are tives with respect to it and other mat- presently in the State of California ters of like character that may arise in conducting certain investigations as a the future. part of their operation as a standing I have spoken of the fact that the committee of the House of Representa- complaint recognizes the official char- tives. They are there in their official acter of the conduct and actions of capacity as members of the committee Members of the House of Representa- and employees of the committee, and tives and the employees of the com- as Members of the House of Represent- mittee. The Constitution provides that, atives and employees of the House of as recited in the resolution: Representatives. They are there, furthermore, by direction of the House of They— Representatives, and they are there on Referring to the Senators and official business as evidenced by the Representatives— action taken in the House yesterday excusing them from attendance here by shall in all cases except treason, fel- reason of their performance of official ony, and breach of the peace be privileged from arrest during their at- duties in California at this time. tendance on the session of their re- The suit that has been filed in the spective Houses, and in going to and State courts of California arises out of returning from the same.

4830

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00058 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 6

It is further provided: resentatives and as a part of the House That for any speech or debate in of Representatives of the Congress of either House they— the United States. Everyone recognizes the investigatory process as a part of Referring to the Senators and the legislative process. So, under the Representatives— rules creating the committee and shall not be questioned in any other under long established precedents, the place. members of that committee and their employees are there operating and act- Through the years that language has ing as an arm of the House of Rep- been construed to mean more than the resentatives. speech or statement made here within To me it seems very clear that if a the four walls of the House of Rep- civil suit for damages can be filed and resentatives; it has been construed to summonses served on Members of the include the conduct of Members and House of Representatives who are their statements in connection with there present, followed by subpenas re- their activities as Members of the quiring them to attend and give testi- House of Representatives. As a result, mony as witnesses on deposition, as is it seems clear to me that under the pointed out in this resolution, then the provisions of the Constitution itself the work of the committee could be com- adoption of the resolution which was pletely obstructed, since conceivably presented is certainly in order. the questioning of the Members of the Let us assume that any regular House of Representatives who are standing committee of the House of presently there would be carried on in- Representatives should conduct a hear- terminably, and the work of the coming and any one of us were there as a mittee stopped. Member of the House in his official capacity. Let us further assume that this Consideration of Concurrent Member saw fit to elicit certain infor- Resolutions mation from a witness by questions and as a result of that questioning the § 6.8 The consideration of a witness, employed by someone, subsequently lost his job. Is the Member of House concurrent resolution the House of Representatives to be which is not otherwise privi- held accountable and haled into court leged may be provided for by on a suit for damages for his participa- a resolution from the Com- tion in the operations of that committee on Rules. mittee as a member of the committee (19) and as Members of the House of Rep- On Oct. 5, 1962, the House resentatives? To me it seems clear that considered the following resolu- no such action can be taken under the tion (H. Res. 827) from the Com- Constitution. mittee on Rules providing for the Furthermore, this committee that is presently in California is there on offi- 19. 108 CONG. REC. 22618, 87th Cong. cial business for the House of Rep- 2d Sess.

4831

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00059 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 6 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

consideration of House Concurrent Rescinding Resolution Pre- Resolution 570: viously Adopted

SENSE OF CONGRESS WITH RESPECT TO § 6.9 By resolution, the House BERLIN rescinded a previously MR. [WILLIAM M.] COLMER [of Mis- adopted resolution whereby sissippi]: Mr. Speaker, by direction of a bill had been referred to the Committee on Rules, I call up the Court of Claims for re- House Resolution 827 and ask for its port. immediate consideration. On Apr. 30, 1957,(20) the House The Clerk read the resolution, as fol- considered by unanimous consent lows: and passed the following resolu- Resolved, That upon the adoption tion (H. Res. 241): of this resolution it shall be in order to move that the House resolve itself Resolved, That the adoption by the into the Committee of the Whole House of Representatives of House House on the State of the Union for Resolution 174, 85th Congress, is the consideration of the concurrent hereby rescinded. The United States resolution (H. Con. Res. 570) ex- Court of Claims is hereby directed to pressing the sense of the Congress return to the House of Representa- with respect to the situation in Ber- tives the bill (H.R. 2648) entitled ‘‘A lin. After general debate, which shall bill for the relief of the MacArthur be confined to the concurrent resolu- Mining Co., Inc., in receivership,’’ to- tion, and shall continue not to exceed gether with all accompanying pa- two hours, to be equally divided and pers, referred to said court by said controlled by the chairman and House Resolution 174. ranking minority member of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, the Requesting Conference concurrent resolution shall be considered as having been read for § 6.10 The House considered a amendment. No amendment shall be in order to said concurrent resolution resolution taking a House except amendments offered by the joint resolution with Senate direction of the Committee on For- eign Affairs and such amendments amendments thereto from shall not be subject to amendment. the Speaker’s table, dis- At the conclusion of the consider- agreeing to the Senate ation of the concurrent resolution for amendment, the Committee shall amendments, and requesting rise and report the concurrent reso- a conference. lution to the House with such ( ) amendments as may have been On Oct. 31, 1939, 21 the House adopted, and the previous question considered the following resolu- shall be considered as ordered on the concurrent resolution and amend- 20. 103 CONG. REC. 6159, 85th Cong. 1st ments thereto, to final passage with- Sess. out intervening motion except one motion to recommit with or without 21. 85 CONG. REC. 1092, 76th Cong. 2d instructions. Sess.

4832

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00060 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 6

tion (H. Res. 320) reported from Distribution of Senate Film Re- the Committee on Rules: port Resolved, That immediately upon the adoption of this resolution, the § 6.12 The Senate agreed to a joint resolution (H.J. Res. 306), the resolution providing for the Neutrality Act of 1939, with Senate designation and distribution amendments thereto, be, and the same is hereby, taken from the of a documentary film pre- Speaker’s table to the end that the pared by a Senate committee amendments of the Senate be, and the same are hereby, disagreed to as a ‘‘Senate Film Report.’’ and a conference is requested with On Oct. 2, 1963,(1) the Senate the Senate on the disagreeing votes agreed to the following resolution of the two Houses. (S. Res. 208): Providing a Standing Order of Resolved, That the film report on water pollution, entitled ‘‘Troubled Wa- Business ters,’’ prepared by the Committee on Public Works, shall be designated as § 6.11 The Senate agreed to a Senate Film Report numbered 1, Eighty-eighth Congress, and that there resolution providing that the be printed seven additional copies of Presiding Officer shall tem- such film, five for the use of that com- porarily suspend business at mittee, and two for the Library of Con- gress. The Secretary of the Senate is 12 noon, on days when the authorized and directed to pay, from Senate has remained in ses- the contingent funds of the Senate, the sion from the preceding cal- actual cost of reproduction of these copies of the film: Provided, That cop- endar day, to allow the Chap- ies of said film may be made available lain to give the customary to nongovernmental agencies or indi- daily prayer. viduals at the cost of reproduction. On Feb. 29, 1960 (22) the Senate Response to Subpena considered and agreed to the following resolution (S. Res. 283): § 6.13 By resolution the House may authorize certain Mem- Resolved, That during the sessions of bers to respond to a subpena the Senate when that body is in con- issued by a federal district tinuous session, the Presiding Officer court in a contempt case. shall temporarily suspend the business (2) of the Senate at noon each day for the On Feb. 23, 1948, the House considered and agreed to the fol- purpose of having the customary daily

prayer by the Chaplain of the Senate. 1. 109 CONG. REC. 18541, 88th Cong. 1st Sess. 22. 106 CONG. REC. 3709, 86th Cong. 2d 2. 94 CONG. REC. 1557, 80th Cong. 2d Sess. Sess.

4833

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00061 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 6 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

lowing privileged resolution (H. leged resolutions (H. Res. 245 and Res. 477): H. Res. 246) permitting its Clerk Whereas Representatives John S. and its Sergeant at Arms to ap- Wood, J. Hardin Peterson, John R. pear before a federal grand jury. Murdock, and Gerald W. Landis, Mem- The resolution pertaining to the bers of this House, have been subpenaed to appear as witnesses before the Clerk was as follows: District Court of the United States for Whereas in re investigation of pos- the District of Columbia to testify at sible violation of title 18, United States 10 a.m. on the 24th day of February Code, section 1001, a subpena duces 1948, in the case of the United States tecum was issued by the United States v. Richard Morford, Criminal No. 366– District Court for the District of Co- 47; and lumbia and addressed to Lyle Snader, Whereas by the privileges of the Clerk of the House of Representatives, House no Member is authorized to ap- directing him to appear before the pear and testify but by the order of the grand jury of said court on Thursday, House: Therefore be it the 28th day of May 1953, at 9:15 Resolved, That Representatives John S. Wood, J. Hardin Peterson, John R. o’clock antemeridian to testify and to Murdock, and Gerald W. Landis are bring with him certain forms, papers, authorized to appear in response to the and records in the possession and subpenas of the District Court of the under the control of the House of Rep- United States for the District of Co- resentatives: Therefore be it lumbia in the case of the United States Resolved, That by the privileges of v. Richard Morford at such time as this House no evidence of a documen- when the House is not sitting in ses- tary character under the control and in sion; and be it further the possession of the House of Rep- Resolved, That a copy of these reso- resentatives can, by the mandate of lutions be transmitted to the said court process of the ordinary courts of jus- as a respectful answer to the subpenas tice, be taken from such control or pos- of the said court. session but by its permission; be it further § 6.14 The House may by reso- Resolved, That when it appears by lution authorize certain of its the order of the court or of the judge officers to appear before a thereof or of any legal officer charged grand jury in response to a with the administration of the orders subpena duces tecum and of such court or judge, that documen- permit the court to take cop- tary evidence in the possession and under the control of the House is need- ies of certain papers. ful for use in any court of justice or be- On May 25, 1953,(3) the House considered and agreed to privi- The resolution (H. Res. 246) allowing the Sergeant at Arms to respond 3. 99 CONG. REC. 5523, 5524, 83d Cong. was identical in terms to that for the 1st Sess. Clerk.

4834

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00062 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 6

fore any judge or such legal officer, for Committee on the Judiciary the promotion of justice, this House to file appearances and pro- will take such order thereon as will promote the ends of justice consistently vide for the defense of cer- with the privileges and rights of this tain Members, former Mem- House; be it further bers, and House employees Resolved, That Lyle O. Snader, Clerk in a civil action. of the House, be authorized to appear (4) at the place and before the grand jury On Aug. 1, 1953, the House of the court named in the subpena considered and agreed to the fol- duces tecum before-mentioned, but lowing privileged resolution (H. shall not take with him any papers, Res. 386): documents, or records on file in his office or under his control or in his pos- Whereas Harold H. Velde, of Illinois, session as Clerk of the House; be it Donald L. Jackson, of California, Mor- further gan M. Moulder, of Missouri, Clyde Resolved, That when said court de- Doyle, of California, and James B. termines upon the materiality and the Frazier, Jr., of Tennessee, all Rep- relevancy of the papers, documents, resentatives in the Congress of the and records called for in the subpena United States; and Louis J. Russell, duces tecum, then the said court, and William Wheeler, employees of the through any of its officers or agents, House of Representatives, were by sub- have full permission to attend with all penas commanded to appear on Mon- proper parties to the proceedings and day and Tuesday, March 30 and 31, then always at any place under the or- 1953 in the city of Los Angeles, Calif., ders and control of this House and and to testify and give their deposi- take copies of any papers, documents, tions in the case of Michael Wilson, et or records and the Clerk is authorized al. v. Loew’s, Incorporated, et al., an to supply certified copies of such pa- action pending in the Superior Court of pers, documents, or records in posses- California in and for the County of Los sion or control of said Clerk that the Angeles; and court has found to be material and rel- Whereas the complaint in the afore- evant, so as, however, the possession of said case of Michael Wilson, et al. v. said papers, documents, and records by Loew’s Incorporated, et al. lists among the said Clerk shall not be disturbed, the parties defendant therein Harold or the same shall not be removed from H. Velde, Bernard W. Kearney, Donald their place of file or custody under said L. Jackson, Francis E. Walter, Morgan Clerk; and be it further M. Moulder, Clyde Doyle, and James Resolved, That a copy of these reso- B. Frazier, members of the Committee lutions be transmitted to the said court on Un-American Activities; John S. as a respectful answer to the subpena Wood, and Charles E. Potter, former duces tecum aforementioned. members of the Committee on Un-

§ 6.15 The House agreed to a 4. 99 CONG. REC. 10949, 10950, 83d resolution authorizing the Cong. 1st Sess.

4835

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00063 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 6 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

American Activities; and Louis J. Rus- and for the County of Los Angeles also sell, and William Wheeler, employees ruled that the subpenas served upon of the Committee on Un-American Ac- Harold H. Velde, Morgan M. Moulder, tivities; and James B. Frazier, Jr., and Louis J. Whereas summonses in the aforesaid Russell should be recalled and quashed case of Michael Wilson et al. v. Loew’s for the reason set forth above, and for Incorporated, et al. were served on the further reasons that such service Harold H. Velde, Donald L. Jackson, was premature and that such service Morgan M. Moulder, Clyde Doyle, was invalid under article I, section 6, James B. Frazier, Jr., Louis J. Russell of the Constitution of the United and William Wheeler while they were States which provides: ‘‘They (the Sen- in the city of Los Angeles, Calif., ac- ators and Representatives) shall in all tively engaged in the performance of cases, except treason, felony, and their duties and obligations as mem- breach of the peace, be privileged from bers and employees of the Committee arrest during their attendance at the on Un-American Activities; and session of their respective Houses, and Whereas Harold H. Velde, Donald L. in going to and returning from the Jackson, Morgan M. Moulder, Clyde same; . . . and for any speech or debate Doyle, James B. Frazier, Jr., Louis J. in either House, they shall not be ques- Russell, and William Wheeler ap- tioned in any other place’’; and peared specially in the case of Michael Whereas on July 20, 1953, the Supe- Wilson, et al. versus Loew’s Incor- rior Court of the State of California in porated, et al., for the purpose of mov- and for the County of Los Angeles fur- ing to set aside the service of sum- ther ruled that the subpenas served on monses and to quash the subpenas Clyde Doyle and Donald Jackson with which they had been served; and should be recalled and quashed be- Whereas on July 20, 1953, the Supe- cause such service was invalid under rior Court of the State of California in the aforementioned article I, section 6, and for the County of Los Angeles of the Constitution of the United ruled that the aforesaid summonses States; and served upon Harold H. Velde, Morgan Whereas the case of Michael Wilson, M. Moulder, James B. Frazier, Jr., and et al. v. Loew’s Incorporated, et al. in Louis J. Russell should be set aside for which the aforementioned Members, the reasons that it was the public pol- former Members, and employees of the icy of the State of California ‘‘that non- House of Representatives are named resident members and attaches of a parties defendant is still pending; and congressional committee who enter the Whereas the summonses with re- territorial jurisdiction of its courts for spect to Donald L. Jackson, Clyde the controlling purpose of conducting Doyle, and William Wheeler in the legislative hearings pursuant to law case of Michael Wilson, et al. v. Loew’s should be privileged from the service of Incorporated, et al., have not been process in civil litigation’’; and quashed: Whereas on July 20, 1953, the Supe- Resolved, That the House of Rep- rior Court of the State of California in resentatives hereby approves of the

4836

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00064 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 6

special appearances of Harold H. or subcommittee, and if deemed advis- Velde, Donald L. Jackson, Morgan M. able by the committee or sub- Moulder, Clyde Doyle, James B. committee, to employ counsel to rep- Frazier, Jr., Louis J. Russell, and Wil- resent any and all of the Members, liam Wheeler theretofore entered in former Members, and employees of the the case of Michael Wilson, et al. v. Committee on Un-American Activities Loew’s Incorporated, et al., and be it who may be named as parties defend- further ant in any such action or actions; and Resolved, That the Committee on the such expenses shall be paid from the Judiciary, acting as a whole or by sub- contingent fund of the House of Rep- committee, is hereby authorized to di- resentatives on vouchers authorized by the Committee on the Judiciary and rect the filing in the case of Michael signed by the chairman thereof and ap- Wilson, et al. v. Loew’s Incorporated, proved by the Committee on House Ad- et al. of such special or general appear- ministration. ances on behalf of any of the Members, former Members, or employees of the § 6.16 The House may by reso- House of Representatives named as defendants therein, and to direct such lution authorize a Member to other or further action with respect to respond to a subpena requir- the aforementioned defendants in such ing him to appear before a manner as will, in the judgment of the state court. Committee on the Judiciary, be con- (5) sistent with the rights and privileges On July 9, 1954, the House of the House of Representatives; and considered the following privileged be it further Resolved, That the Com- resolution (H. Res. 640): mittee on the Judiciary is also author- Whereas James A. Haley, a Rep- ized and directed to arrange for the de- resentative in the Congress of the fense of the Members, former Mem- United States, has been served with a bers, and employees of the Committee subpena to appear as a witness before on Un-American Activities in any suit the circuit court of the State of Florida hereafter brought against such Mem- for Sarasota County to testify at 10 bers, former Members, and employees, o’clock a.m., on the 3d day of August or any one or more of them growing 1954, in the case of the County of out of the actions of such Members, Sarasota, Florida v. State of Florida former Members, and employees while and the Taxpayers, Etc., and performing such duties and obligations Whereas by the privileges of the imposed upon them by the laws of the House of Representatives no Member Congress and the rules and resolutions is authorized to appear and testify but of the House of Representatives. The by the order of the House: Therefore be Committee on the Judiciary is author- it ized to incur all expenses necessary for Resolved, That Representative James the purposes hereof, including but not A. Haley is authorized to appear in re- limited to expenses of travel and sub- sistence, employment of counsel and 5. 100 CONG. REC. 10904, 83d Cong. 2d other persons to assist the committee Sess.

4837

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00065 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 6 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

sponse to the subpena of the Circuit session and under the control of the Court of the State of Florida for Sara- House of Representatives: Therefore be sota County on Tuesday, August 3, it 1954, in the case of the County of Resolved, That by the privileges of Sarasota, Florida, v. State of Florida this House no evidence of a documen- and the Taxpayers, Etc.; and be it fur- tary character under the control and in ther the possession of the House of Rep- Resolved, That a copy of these reso- resentatives can, by the mandate of lutions be transmitted to the said court process of the ordinary courts of jus- as a respectful answer to the subpena tice, be taken from such control or pos- of the said court. session but by its permission; be it further § 6.17 The House considered a Resolved, That when it appears by resolution relating to a sub- the order of the court or of the judge pena duces tecum served on thereof, or of any legal officer charged the House dispersing clerk with the administration of the orders by a U.S. District Court, au- of such court of judge, that documen- thorizing him to appear in tary evidence in the possession and under the control of the House is need- the court and permitting the ful for use in any court of justice, or court through its agents to before any judge or such legal officer, take copies of papers in pos- for the promotion of justice, this House session of the clerk. will take such order thereon as will promote the ends of justice consistently (6) On Feb. 7, 1955, the House with the privileges and rights of this considered and agreed to the fol- House; be it further lowing privileged resolution (H. Resolved, That Harry M. Livingston, Res. 132): disbursing clerk of the House, be authorized to appear at the place and be- Whereas in the case of Bettie M. Bacon v. The United States (No. 2384– fore the court named in the subpena 53, civil docket) pending in the District duces tecum before-mentioned, but Court of the United States for the Dis- shall not take with him any papers or trict of Columbia, a subpena duces documents on file in his office or under tecum was issued by the said court and his control or in possession of the addressed to Harry M. Livingston, dis- Clerk of the House; be it further bursing clerk of the House of Rep- Resolved, That when said court de- resentatives, directing him to appear termines upon the materiality and the as a witness before the said court on relevancy of the papers and documents the 8th day of February 1955, at 1:30 called for in the subpena duces tecum, post meridian and to bring with him then the said court, through any of its certain and sundry papers in the pos- officers or agents, have full permission to attend with all proper parties to the 6. 101 CONG. REC. 1215, 84th Cong. 1st proceeding and then always at any Sess. place under the orders and control of

4838

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00066 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 7

this House and take copies of any doc- years as a Senator in his country, from uments or papers and the Clerk is au- which position His Excellency was thorized to supply certified copies of elected President, both of which facts such documents and papers in posses- Members of the United States Senate sion or control of said Clerk that the have taken due and appreciative no- court has found to be material and rel- tice; and evant, except minutes and transcripts Whereas the gracious wife and com- of executive sessions, and any evidence panion of President-elect Valencia is of witnesses in respect thereto which now hospitalized in the United States: the court or other proper officer thereof Be it shall desire, so as, however, the pos- Resolved, That the Senate sends to session of said documents and papers Mrs. Valencia greetings and welcome, by the said Clerk shall not be dis- and best wishes for early recovery; and turbed, or the same shall not be re- be it further moved from their place of file or cus- Resolved, That a bouquet of Amer- tody under said Clerk; and be it fur- ican roses be purchased from the con- ther tingent fund of the Senate and be Resolved, That copy of these resolu- taken by special courier to Mrs. Valen- tions be transmitted to the said court cia, as a token of the Senate’s esteem as a respectful answer to the subpena for her, for her distinguished husband, aforementioned. and for the people of Colombia.

Expressing Sympathy § 6.18 The Senate agreed to a § 7. Resolutions of Approval or resolution wishing a speedy Disapproval of Executive recovery to the wife of a Co- Plans; the ‘‘Legislative Veto’’ lombian official who was Congress has, from time to confined to a hospital while time, provided procedures where- visiting the United States by it has by statute reserved to with her husband. itself the right to disapprove certain executive actions. These pro- On June 25, 1962,(7) the Senate considered and agreed to the following cedures envision some form of resolution (S. Res. 355): congressional action on a simple Whereas the newly elected President or concurrent resolution of dis- of Colombia, the Honorable Guillermo approval or approval.(8) This prac- Valencia, is now a visitor to the United States; and 8. Resolutions of approval or dis- Whereas Mr. Valencia has served approval fall into three categories: with distinction for 20 consecutive those in which the resolution must be acted upon by either or both 7. 108 CONG. REC. 11653, 87th Cong. Houses and which are privileged for 2d Sess. consideration; those in which the

4839

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00067 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 7 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

tice has come to be known as the contained in section 244(d)(2) of ‘‘legislative (or congressional) the Immigration and Nationality veto,’’ and has been used exten- Act in Immigration and Natu- sively as a congressional device to ralization Service v Chadha et al. maintain control over executive decided June 23, 1983.(10) The plans and actions authorized by opinion of the Court is to the ef- statute. This procedure has been fect that the constitutional re- employed only when it has been quirement of bicameral consider- authorized by a specific statute ation and presentment to the and for the specific purpose stated President is an absolute require- in such statute, there being no in- ment for all exercises of legislative herent power under the Constitu- power. tion by which the Congress may The precedents contained in nullify a duly authorized function this section must be considered in of the executive branch. The pro- light of the Court’s ruling. They cedure prescribed by a given stat- are retained because of their his- ute in this respect varies accord- toric significance and because ing to the extent of control the they may yet have precedential Congress wished to exercise. value in other contexts and in the The constitutionality of these event future legislative mecha- legislative veto provisions has nisms are devised to overcome the been questioned since their ear- constitutional infirmities recog- liest use.(9) The Supreme Court nized in Chadha. has in fact invalidated the one- Under some statutes enacted House legislative veto mechanism prior to the Chadha decision, the branch or agency of the govern- resolution must be acted upon by ei- ment affected must submit certain ther or both Houses but which are of its decisions or plans to the not privileged; and those in which Houses of Congress or directly to the resolution need only be acted the appropriate congressional upon by designated committees of either or both Houses. See House committees for a stated period, Rules and Manual § 1013 (1981). All and such decisions or plans will three types are in a sense ‘‘non- not go into effect if the Congress legislative’’ in that none are pre- passes a concurrent resolution sented to the President for his ap- stating in substance that it does proval or disapproval pursuant to not favor the proposed action.(11) Art. I, § 7 of the Constitution. 9. See President Carter’s message on 10. 462 U.S.——. the subject of legislative vetoes, June 11. For example, the Atomic Energy Act 21, 1978, H. Doc. 95–357. of 1954 (42 USC § 2074) provides

4840

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00068 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 7

Such provisions are to be distin- Committee on Internal Revenue guished from those statutes under Taxation.(13) which Congress is entitled to re- The staff of the joint committee ceive periodic reports from an then reviews each report it re- agency on its plans or programs, ceives from the Internal Revenue but does not have direct authority Service to decide whether or not it to disapprove of them.(12) How- agrees with the service’s deter- ever, the congressional committee mination. Frequently a tax refund receiving reports under such a or credit case will not become statute may exercise an informal final until the joint committee and negotiating procedure with the the service have through consulta- agency involved in order to bring tion agreed on the proper deter- its decisions into conformity with mination. the views of the committee. The In addition to expressing its dis- Internal Revenue Code, for exam- approval by resolution the Con- ple, provides that whenever the gress may choose to amend the law under which the decision or Internal Revenue Service deter- plan was submitted, or by statute mines that a taxpayer is entitled suspend the action of the report- to a tax refund or credit in excess ing agency. For example, during of $100,000 it shall not award the the 83d Congress the Supreme money to the taxpayer until 30 Court drafted and submitted to days after it has submitted a re- the Congress under a mandatory port of its decision to the Joint 90-day waiting period new rules of evidence for federal courts and that the Atomic Energy Commission must submit to the Joint Committee amendments to the federal rules on Atomic Energy, for a period of 60 of civil and criminal procedure. days before becoming effective, its Under other statutes, the agen- determination as to the distribution cy involved must come into agree- of certain ‘‘special nuclear material’’. ment with the appropriate con- The proposals do not become effec- gressional committees regarding tive if the Congress passes a concur- the final terms of such plan. Thus, rent resolution expressing its dis- a 1949 statute authorizing the es- approval thereof. tablishment of a joint long-range 12. See 18 USC § 3771 and 28 USC § 2072. The Supreme Court approving ground for guided missiles proved, by way of dictum, the valid- contained the following language: ity of the waiting period requirement . . . Prior to the acquisition under regarding the adoption of new court the authority of this section of any rules in Sibbach v Wilson & Co., 312 U.S. 1, 15 (1941). 13. 26 USC § 6405.

4841

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00069 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 7 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

lands or rights or other interests per- constitutional principle of separation of taining thereto, the Secretary of the powers prescribed in articles I and II Air Force shall come into agreement of the Constitution which place the leg- with the Armed Services Committees islative power in the Congress and the of the Senate and the House of Rep- executive power in the executive resentatives with respect to the acqui- branch. sition of such lands, rights, or other in- The making of such a contract or terests.(14) agreement on behalf of the United The ‘‘come-into-agreement’’ States is a purely executive or administrative function, like the negotiation clause was used during and after and execution of Government contracts World War II, but in recent years generally. Thus, while Congress may it has fallen into disuse because of enact legislation governing the making strong Presidential protest. For of Government contracts, it may not example, in 1954 President Eisen- delegate to its Members or committees the power to make such contracts, ei- hower vetoed a bill (H.R. 7512, ther directly or by giving to them a 83d Cong.) authorizing the trans- power to approve or disapprove a con- fer of federally owned land within tract which an executive officer pro- Camp Blanding Military Reserva- poses to make. Moreover such a proce- tion, Florida, to the State of Flor- dure destroys the clear lines of responsibility for results which the Constitu- ida after the Secretary of the tion provides.(15) Army had come into agreement with the Committees on Armed 15. H. Doc. No. 403, 83d Cong. 2d Sess. Services of the Senate and House (May 26, 1954). See also the memo- of Representatives regarding the randum of Mr. J. V. Rankin of the terms of such transfer. In his veto Department of Justice expressing disapproval of a come-into-agree- message the President said: ment clause in proposed amend- The purpose of this clause is to vest ments to the Public Building Act of in the Committees of Armed Services 1949. 100 CONG. REC. 4878, 4879, of the Senate and House of Represent- 83d Cong. 2d Sess., Apr. 8, 1954. atives power to approve or disapprove President Eisenhower made even any agreement which the Secretary of stronger objection in his budget mes- the Army proposes to make with the sage of 1960 to another come-into- State of Florida pursuant to section agreement statute: ‘‘In the budget 2(4). The practical effect would be to message for 1959, and again for place the power to make such agree- 1960, I recommended immediate re- ment jointly in the Secretary of the peal of section 601 of the Act of Sep- Army and the members of the Commit- tember 28, 1951 (65 Stat. 365). This tees on Armed Services. In so doing, section prevents the military depart- the bill would violate the fundamental ments and the Office of Civil and De- fense Mobilization from carrying out 14. Pub. L. No. 81–60, § 2, 63 Stat. 66. certain transactions involving real

4842

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00070 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 7

Another procedural device found The Committee on Armed Services of in agency authorization statutes is the Senate and the House of Rep- the clause providing that the resentatives must be consulted and the agency charged with general exec- President’s approval must be obtained before any condemnation proceedings utive authorization under a stat- may be started under this chap- ute must consult the committees ter. . . .(16) of both Houses that have jurisdiction over the subject matter of the Still other statutes provide that statute before taking certain of an affirmative resolution of ap- the specific actions authorized proval must be adopted by the under it. For example, the statute congressional committees having pertaining to the disposition of jurisdiction of the subject matter naval petroleum reserves declares before a plan drafted under the that: provisions of such statute by an executive agency shall go into ef- property unless they come into fect. This affirmative approval agreement with the Committees on procedure has usually been tied to Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives. As I the appropriation process. Thus, a have stated previously, the Attorney statute will read that ‘‘no appro- General has advised me that this priation shall be made’’ until the section violates fundamental con- particular projects authorized stitutional principles. Accordingly, if under it have been drafted by an it is not repealed by the Congress at agency concerned, submitted to its present session, I shall have no alternative thereafter but to direct the appropriate congressional the Secretary of Defense to disregard committees, and approved by the section unless a court of com- them by means of committee reso- petent jurisdiction determines other- lution.(17) wise.’’ Budget Message of the Presi- dent for fiscal year 1961. H. Doc. No. 16. 10 USC § 7431. 255, 86th Cong. 2d Sess., and 106 17. See § 7 of the Public Building Act of CONG. REC. 674, 86th Cong. 2d Sess., 1959 (40 USC § 606), and § 2 of the Jan. 18, 1960. That same year the Watershed Protection and Flood Congress amended the statute that Control Act of 1954, as amended (16 the President found objectionable by USC § 1002). The Public Building changing the come-into-agreement Act of 1954 provided that if a project clause to one permitting a committee approved by committee resolution re- resolution of disapproval of military ceives no appropriation within a year real estate transactions. Act of June the committee may rescind their ap- 8, 1960, Pub. L. No. 86–500, title V, proval at any time thereafter before § 511(1), 74 Stat. 186; 10 USC an appropriation has been made. See § 2662. House Rules and Manual § 1013

4843

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00071 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 7 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

The legislative veto came into shall not go into effect. The act use in the modern practice of the also sets forth the procedure by Congress with the passage of the which such resolutions shall be Reorganization Act of 1939.(18) considered in the House and Sen- Under the act the President is au- ate as exceptions to the regular thorized to draft plans for the re- rules of procedure.(21) organization of the executive The use of the resolution of dis- branch. Such plans will go into ef- approval has not been limited to fect upon their completion and 60 reorganization plans of the Presi- days after the President has sub- dent. It is found in other statutes mitted them to the Congress. as well, as illustrated by the fol- However, if during that 60-day pe- lowing examples. (19) riod ‘‘. . . either House passes The Immigration and Nation- a resolution stating in substance ality Act of 1952 provides that that the House does not favor the when the Attorney General deter- (20) reorganization plan’’, the plan mines that certain classes of (1981) for compilation of ‘‘Legislative aliens are to be deported he may Veto’’ provisions contained in recent suspend the deportation after republic laws. viewing the petitions filed by the 18. Apr. 3, 1939, Ch. 36, 53 Stat. 561; 5 individuals affected. Such suspen- USC §§ 901–913. sions, however, will not become 19. The 60-day period must be contin- final until the Attorney General uous during a session of the Con- gress. It is broken only by an ad- has reported his determination to journment of the Congress sine die, the Congress and neither the Sen- and it does not include adjournments ate nor the House of Representa- of more than three days within a tives has passed a simple resolu- session of Congress. 5 USC § 906(b). tion, before the end of the session 20. 5 USC § 906(a). The act originally following the session in which the provided that disapproval must be report is received, disapproving expressed by concurrent resolution (53 Stat. 562, 563). However, the re- such determination. The law fur- quirement was changed to a simple ther provides that in cases involv- resolution by the 1949 amendments ing certain classes of aliens sus- (June 20, 1949, Ch. 226, § 6, 63 Stat. 205). Houses have defeated a resolution of Under provisions contained in a disapproval, may be effective at a reorganization plan, any provision time earlier than the expiration of thereof may be effective at a time the 60-day period mentioned above. later than the date on which the 5 USC § 906(c). plan otherwise is effective or, if both 21. 5 USC §§ 908–913.

4844

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00072 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 7

pension of deportation may be fi- which declares that the powers con- nalized before the end of the fol- ferred by or pursuant to subsection (a) are no longer necessary to promote the lowing session of Congress by the defense of the United States, neither adoption of a concurrent resolu- the President nor the head of any de- tion approving the Attorney Gen- partment or agency shall exercise any eral’s findings.(1) of the powers conferred by or pursuant The resolution of disapproval to subsection (a); except that until July 1, 1946, any of such powers may be ex- may take the form of a committee ercised to the extent necessary to carry resolution. For example, the Small out a contract or agreement with such Projects Reclamation Act of a foreign government made before July 1956 (2) provides that no appro- 1, 1943, or before the passage of such priation shall be made for partici- concurrent resolution, whichever is the earlier.(4) pation in certain projects under the act prior to 60 days after the 4. Act of Mar. 11, 1941, Ch. 11, § 3(c), Secretary of the Interior has sub- 55 Stat. 32. See also the Selective mitted his findings and approval Service Extension Act of Aug. 18, for such projects to the Congress, 1941, Ch. 362, § 2, 55 Stat. 626; the ‘‘. . . and then only if, within said Emergency Price Control Act of June 30, 1942, Ch. 26, § 1(b), 56 Stat. 24; sixty days, neither the House nor the Economic Cooperation Act of the Senate Interior and Insular Apr. 3, 1948, Ch. 169, title I, § 122, Affairs Committee disapproves the 62 Stat. 155; the ‘‘Gulf of Tonkin project proposal by committee res- Resolution’’ of Aug. 10, 1964, Pub. L. olution.’’ (3) No. 88–408, § 3, 78 Stat. 384; and Some statutes have provided the War Powers Resolution of Nov. 7, 1973, Pub. L. No. 93–148, § 5(c), that the entire authority granted 87 Stat. 556–557. therein may be terminated by a President Franklin D. Roosevelt concurrent resolution of the Con- objected to the inclusion of such a gress prior to the stated expira- concurrent resolution disapproval tion date of the act, if one is pro- provision in the Lend-Lease Act. vided. Thus, the Lend-Lease Act However, he did not make his objections public because he felt the provided: measure was urgently needed and he After June 30, 1943, or after the pas- feared endangering its passage by sage of a concurrent resolution by the his own pronouncement. R. H. Jack- two Houses before June 30, 1943, son, A Presidential Legal Opinion, 66 Harv. L. Rev. 1353, at 1356 1. 8 USC § 1254 (1970 ed.) (1953). 2. 70 Stat. 1044. For a compilation of the views of a 3. 70 Stat. 1045, § 4(c), 43 USC number of Presidents on the various § 422d(d) (1970 ed.). forms of the legislative veto, see

4845

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00073 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 7 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

Collateral References of the principles of the Charter of the Congressional Adaptation: The Come- United Nations and of international into-Agreement Provision. 37 Geo. law, have deliberately and repeatedly Wash. L. Rev. 387 (1968). attacked United States naval vessels Cooper, Joseph and Ann. The Legislative lawfully present in international wa- Veto and the Constitution. 30 Geo. ters, and have thereby created a seri- Wash. L. Rev. 467 (1962). ous threat to international peace; and Harris, Joseph P. Congressional Control Whereas these attacks are part of a of Administration, CH. 8, The Legisla- tive Veto. The Brookings Institution, deliberate and systematic campaign of Washington, D.C. (1964). aggression that the Communist regime Jackson, Robert H. A Presidential Legal in North Vietnam has been waging Opinion. 66 Harv. L. Rev. 1353 (1953). against its neighbors and the nations joined with them in the collective de- f fense of their freedom; and Terminating Authority by Con- Whereas the United States is assist- ing the peoples of Southeast Asia to current Resolution protect their freedom and has no territorial, military or political ambitions in § 7.1 The House adopted a that area, but desires only that these joint resolution relating to peoples should be left in peace to work preservation of peace in out their own destinies in their own Southeast Asia, authorizing way: Now, therefore, be it the President to repel ag- Resolved by the Senate and House of gression by North Vietnam, Representatives of the United States of and providing that the Con- America in Congress assembled, That the Congress approves and supports gress may terminate such au- the determination of the President, as thority by concurrent resolu- Commander in Chief, to take all nection. essary measures to repel any armed On Aug. 7, 1964,(5) the House attack against the forces of the United considered and passed the fol- States and to prevent further aggres- lowing joint resolution (H.J. Res. sion. 1145): Sec. 2. The United States regards as vital to its national interest and to Whereas naval units of the Com- world peace the maintenance of inter- munist regime in Vietnam, in violation national peace and security in South- Hearings on the Separation of Pow- east Asia. Consonent with the Con- ers Doctrine Before the Sub- stitution of the United States and the committee on Separation of Powers Charter of the United Nations and in of the Senate Committee on the Ju- accordance with obligations under the diciary, 90th Cong. 1st Sess., pp. Southeast Asia Collective Defense 215–228 (1967). Treaty, the United States is, therefore, 5. 110 CONG. REC. 18538, 18539, 88th prepared, as the President determines, Cong. 2d Sess. to take all necessary steps, including

4846

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00074 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 7

the use of armed force, to assist any the Department of the Interior on Red member of protocol state of the South- Willow Dam and Reservoir in Ne- east Asia Collective Defense Treaty re- braska. questing assistance in defense of its THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE [John freedom. W. McCormack, of Massachusetts]: Is Sec. 3. This resolution shall expire there objection to the present consider- when the President shall determine ation of the concurrent resolution? that the peace and security of the area MR. ASPINALL: Mr. Speaker, I ask is reasonably assured by international unanimous consent that a similar Sen- conditions created by action of the ate resolution, Senate Joint Resolution United Nations or otherwise, except 190, be considered in lieu of the House that it may be terminated earlier by Concurrent Resolution. concurrent resolution of the Congress. THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE: Is there objection to the request of the gen- Approval of Executive Plan tleman from Colorado? There being no objection, the Clerk § 7.2 The House passed a Sen- read the Senate joint resolution, as fol- ate joint resolution express- lows: ing approval of a report of Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United the Department of the Inte- States of America in Congress assem- rior on the construction of a bled, That the report of the Sec- retary of the Interior demonstrating dam and reservoir, and then economic justification for construc- tabled a similar House con- tion and operation of the Red Willow Dam and Reservoir is hereby ap- current resolution called up proved.(8) on the Consent Calendar. On Aug. 18, 1958,(6) Mr. Wayne Changing Effective Date of Ex- N. Aspinall, of Colorado, sought ecutive Plan and obtained unanimous consent that a Senate joint resolution be § 7.3 The House adopted a considered in lieu of a similar House joint resolution chang- House concurrent resolution on the Consent Calendar.(7) The Sen- 8. Parliamentarian’s Note: Pub. L. No. ate joint resolution (S.J. Res. 190) 84–505 (70 Stat. 126), provided that was passed, and the House con- there should be no expenditure of current resolution was laid on the funds for construction of the Red Willow Dam until the Secretary of table. The proceedings were as fol- the Interior, with the approval of the lows: President, had submitted to the Con- The Clerk called the resolution (H. gress a report and the Congress had Con. Res. 301) to approve the report of approved such report. Following re- search as to the meaning of the word 6. 104 CONG. REC. 18290, 18291, 85th ‘‘Congress’’ in the statute, it was de- Cong. 2d Sess. cided that the approval should take 7. H. Con. Res. 301, 85th Cong. 2d the form of a joint resolution for Sess. (1958). Presidential signature.

4847

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00075 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 7 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

ing the effective date of a re- the Congress on April 25, 1939, and organization plan. the provisions of reorganization plan No. II, submitted to the Congress on (9) On May 23, 1940, the House May 9, 1939, shall take effect on July considered and passed the fol- 1, 1939, notwithstanding the provi- lowing joint resolution (H.J. Res. sions of the Reorganization Act of 551): 1939.(11) Resolved, etc., That the provisions of Reorganization Plan No. V, submitted Disapproval of Executive Plan to the Congress on May 22, 1940, shall take effect on the tenth day after the date of enactment of this joint resolu- § 7.5 Formerly, a privileged tion, notwithstanding the provisions of concurrent resolution was the Reorganization Act of 1939. used to express disapproval Sec. 2. Nothing in such plan or this joint resolution shall be construed as of an executive reorganiza- having the effect of continuing any tion plan. agency or function beyond the time (12) when it would have terminated with- On May 3, 1939, the House out regard to such plan or this joint considered and rejected the fol- resolution or of continuing any func- lowing concurrent resolution: tion beyond the time when the agency in which it was vested would have ter- HOUSE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 19 minated without regard to such plan or this joint resolution. Resolved by the House of Representa- tives (the Senate concurring), That the § 7.4 The House passed a Sen- Congress does not favor the Reorga- ate joint resolution changing nization Plan No. I, transmitted to the date when certain reor- Congress by the President on April 25, ( ) ganization plans of the Presi- 1939. 13 dent would go into effect. 11. See also 86 CONG. REC. 6712, 76th (10) On June 1, 1939, by direction Cong. 3d Sess., May 23, 1940. of the Select Committee on Gov- 12. 84 CONG. REC. 5085, 76th Cong. 1st ernment Organization, Mr. John Sess. J. Cochran, of Missouri, called up 13. See also 93 CONG. REC. 7252, 80th a joint resolution (S.J. Res. 138) Cong. 1st Sess., June 18, 1947; 93 which the House considered and CONG. REC. 6898, 80th Cong. 1st passed: Sess., June 12, 1947; and 86 CONG. Resolved, etc., That the provisions of REC. 6027–49, 76th Cong. 3d Sess., reorganization plan No. I, submitted to May 14, 1940. The Reorganization Act of 1949 changed from concurrent 9. 86 CONG. REC. 6713, 76th Cong. 3d to simple the form of resolution used Sess. in disapproving reorganization plans. 10. 84 CONG. REC. 6527, 76th Cong. 1st June 20, 1949, Ch. 226, § 6, 63 Stat. Sess. 205; 5 USC § 906(a).

4848

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00076 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 7

Discharge by Unanimous Con- THE SPEAKER: (16) The Clerk will resent port the resolution. The Clerk read as follows: § 7.6 The Select Committee on HOUSE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 60 Reorganization was dis- Resolved by the House of Rep- charged from further consid- resentatives (the Senate concurring), eration of a resolution dis- That the Congress does not favor the approving a reorganization Reorganization Plan No. IV transmitted to Congress by the President plan by unanimous consent. on April 11, 1940. (14) On May 7, 1940, Mr. Clar- MR. [JOHN J.] COCHRAN [of Mis- ence F. Lea, of California, moved souri]: Mr. Speaker, the majority mem- to discharge the Select Committee bers of the Select Committee on Orga- on Government Organization from nization are in accord with the gen- further consideration of House tleman from California, and I ask Concurrent Resolution 60 (dis- unanimous consent that the motion of approving Reorganization Plan the gentleman from California to dis- No. IV): (15) charge the select committee be considered as having been agreed to. 14. 86 CONG. REC. 5676, 76th Cong. 3d THE SPEAKER: Without objection, it Sess. is so ordered. 15. 5 USC § 911(a) at that time provided There was no objection. that a motion to discharge a committee from further consideration of Parliamentarian’s Note: The a resolution disapproving a reorga- motion here was privileged, but nization plan of the President was was agreed to by unanimous con- privileged when the resolution had sent to avoid debate and a vote on been before the committee for 10 cal- the discharge motion. endar days. 5 USC § 911 at present provides that if the committee to which is referred a resolution as Qualification to Offer Motion specified has not reported such reso- to Discharge Resolution lution or identical resolution at the end of 45 calendar days of contin- § 7.7 A Member must qualify as uous session of Congress after its in- being in favor of a resolution troduction, such committee shall be disapproving a reorganiza- deemed to be discharged from fur- tion plan in order to move to ther consideration of such resolution discharge a committee from and such resolution shall be placed on the appropriate calendar of the further consideration there- House involved. Pub. L. No. 81–109 of. as amended by Pub. L. No. 95–17 and extended by Pub. L. No. 96–230. 16. Sam Rayburn (Tex.).

4849

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00077 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 7 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

On Aug. 3, 1961,(17) Mr. H. R. ations from further consideration of House Resolution 335, introduced by Gross, of Iowa, offered the fol- Mr. Monagan, disapproving Reorga- lowing motion: nization Plan No. 6, transmitted to Mr. Gross moves to discharge the Congress by the President on June 12, 1961. Committee on Government Operations from further consideration of House THE SPEAKER: (1) Is the gentleman in Resolution 335, introduced by Mr. favor of the resolution? Monagan, disapproving Reorganization MR. GROSS. Mr. Speaker, I am in Plan No. 6, transmitted to Congress by favor of the disapproving resolution, the President on June 12, 1961. yes. ( ) THE SPEAKER: 18 Is the gentleman THE SPEAKER: The gentleman is en- in favor of the resolution? titled to 30 minutes. MR. GROSS: Mr. Speaker, I am in The gentleman from Florida will be favor of the disapproving resolution, recognized for 30 minutes.(2) yes. Parliamentarian’s Note: The THE SPEAKER: The gentleman is entitled to 30 minutes.(19) Member opposed must also qualify. Debate on Motion to Discharge § 7.9 Debate on a motion to § 7.8 Debate on a motion to discharge the Committee on discharge a committee from Government Operations from further consideration of a consideration of a resolution resolution disapproving a re- disapproving a reorganiza- organization plan is limited tion plan was, by unanimous to one hour and is equally di- consent, extended from one vided between the Member to two hours to be controlled making the motion and a and divided by the pro- Member opposed thereto. ponent of the motion and a On Aug. 3, 1961,(20) Mr. H. R. Member designated by the Gross, of Iowa, offered a privi- Speaker. leged motion: On July 18, 1961,(3) Mr. John The Clerk read as follows: W. McCormack, of Massachusetts, made the following unanimous- Mr. Gross moves to discharge the Committee on Government Oper- consent request: MR. MCCORMACK: Mr. Speaker, I ask 17. 107 CONG. REC. 14548, 87th Cong. unanimous consent that in the event a 1st Sess. 18. Sam Rayburn (Tex.). 1. Sam Rayburn (Tex.). 19. See 5 USC § 911. 2. See 5 USC § 911(b). 20. 107 CONG. REC. 14548, 87th Cong. 3. 107 CONG. REC. 12774, 87th Cong. 1st Sess. 1st Sess.

4850

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00078 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 7

motion is made to discharge the Com- opposing Reorganization Plan No. mittee on Government Operations on 1 of 1962, Senator Mike Mans- the resolution disapproving Reorga- field, of Montana, raised a par- nization Plan No. 7, that the time for liamentary inquiry: debate be extended from 1 hour to 2 hours, one-half to be controlled by the Mr. President, I should like to raise proponent of the motion and one-half a parliamentary inquiry of my own: I by a Member designated by the Speak- should like to have a ruling from the Chair as to the appropriate procedure er. ( ) for a motion of this kind. THE SPEAKER: 4 Is there objection to ( ) THE VICE PRESIDENT: 7 The under- the request of the gentleman from standing of the Chair is that debate on Massachusetts? the motion is limited to 1 hour, to be There was no objection.(5) equally divided. If a point of order is made or if there is a quorum call or if § § 7.10 The Presiding Officer the Senator from Montana or any other Senator obtains the floor and ruled that in the Senate the speaks, the time available under the one hour of debate on a mo- motion will be running. tion to discharge a com- Parliamentarian’s Note: The mittee from further consider- ruling in the House would be to ation of a resolution dis- the contrary. Under the prece- approving a reorganization dents, since debate is not set by plan is inclusive of time con- the clock, votes, quorum calls, sumed by quorum calls, par- etc., do not come out of the time. liamentary inquiries, and Motion to Consider Resolution points of order. of Disapproval On Feb. 20, 1962,(6) during consideration of a motion to discharge § 7.11 A motion that the House the Committee on Government resolve itself into the Com- Operations from further consider- mittee of the Whole for the ation of Senate Resolution 288, consideration of a resolution disapproving a reorganiza- 4. Sam Rayburn (Tex.). tion plan is highly privileged 5. Debate on motions to discharge reso- and may be called up by any lutions disapproving reorganization plans is limited to one hour (63 Stat. Member. 207, 5 USC § 911(b)) rather than 20 On June 8, 1961,(8) Mr. H. R. minutes under the normal discharge Gross, of Iowa, raised a par- procedure (Rule XXVII clause 4, liamentary inquiry: House Rules and Manual § 908 (1981)). 7. Lyndon B. Johnson (Tex.). 6. 108 CONG. REC. 2528, 87th Cong. 2d 8. 107 CONG. REC. 9775–77, 87th Cong. Sess. 1st Sess.

4851

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00079 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 7 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

Mr. Speaker, is it in order and prop- On June 10, 1947,(12) Mr. Clare er at this time to submit a highly priv- E. Hoffman, of Michigan, made ileged motion? THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE: (9) If the the following statement regarding matter to which the gentleman refers a resolution disapproving the is highly privileged, it would be in President’s Reorganization Plan order. No. 2 of 1947: MR. GROSS: Then, Mr. Speaker, under the provisions of section 205(a) Mr. Speaker, I move that the House Public Law 109, the Reorganization resolve itself into the Committee of the ( ) Act of 1949, 10 I submit a motion. . . . Whole House on the State of the Union The Clerk read as follows: for the consideration of House Concur- Mr. Gross moves that the House rent Resolution 49; and pending that resolve itself into the Committee of motion, Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous the Whole House on the State of the consent that general debate be limited Union for the consideration of H. to 3 hours, the time to be equally di- Res. 303 introduced by Mr. Monagan vided and controlled by the gentleman disapproving Reorganization Plan No 2 transmitted to the Congress by the from Alabama [Mr. Manasco] and my- President on April 27, 1961.(11) self. THE SPEAKER: (13) Is there objection Consideration of Resolution of to the request of the gentleman from Disapproval Michigan? There was no objection. § 7.12 The following procedure THE SPEAKER: The question is on the was employed in the House motion offered by the gentleman from Michigan? in considering a resolution The motion was agreed to. disapproving a reorganization plan of the President. § 7.13 After a committee has reported a resolution dis- 9. Oren Harris (Ark.). approving a reorganization 10. Section 205 of the Reorganization plan, any Member may move Act of 1949 (68 Stat. 207, 5 USC § 912(a)) provided ‘‘When the Com- that the House proceed to mittee has reported, or has been dis- consideration thereof, and a charged from further consideration Member is not required to of, a resolution with respect to a re- qualify as being in favor of organization plan, it is at any time the resolution in order to thereafter in order (even though a previous motion to the same effect move that the House resolve has been disagreed to) to move to into the Committee of the proceed to the consideration of the Whole to consider it. resolution. The motion is highly privileged and is not debatable.’’ 12. 93 CONG. REC. 6722, 80th Cong. 1st 11. 107 CONG. REC. 9777, 87th Cong. 1st Sess. Sess. 13. Joseph W. Martin, Jr. (Mass.).

4852

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00080 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 7

On July 19, 1961,(14) Mr. Dante On May 9, 1950,(17) Mr. Clare E. B. Fascell, of Florida, moved that Hoffman, of Michigan, raised a the House resolve itself into the point of order against the consid- Committee of the Whole House on eration of the general appropria- the State of the Union for the con- tion bill of 1951 (H.R. 7786): sideration of the resolution (H. MR. HOFFMAN of Michigan: Mr. Res. 328) disapproving Reorga- Speaker, I make the point of order that nization Plan No. 5 transmitted to the House is not proceeding in the reg- the Congress by the President on ular order because under section 205a May 24, 1961. Mr. H. R. Gross, of of the Reorganization Act, which is Iowa, raised a parliamentary in- Public Law 109 of the Eighty-first Con- gress, first session, any Member of the quiry based on his contention that House is privileged, and this is a high- a Member so moving must qualify ly privileged motion, to make the mo- as being in favor of such resolution that the House proceed to the con- tion. sideration of House Resolution 516. The gentleman from Michigan being MR. GROSS: . . . Is the gentleman on his feet to present this highly privi- from Florida in favor of the resolution, leged motion, the regular order is that or does he disfavor the resolution? he be recognized for that purpose that THE SPEAKER: (15) Under the rules, the motion be entertained and the the gentleman does not have to qualify question put before the House, and my in that respect on this particular mo- motion is that the House proceed to tion.(16) the consideration of House Resolution 516. Precedence of Consideration THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE: (18) That is the resolution disapproving one of § 7.14 Consideration of resolu- the reorganization plans? tions disapproving reorga- MR. HOFFMAN of Michigan: That is nization plans of the Presi- right, House Resolution 516 dis- dent does not take prece- approving plan No. 12. . . . dence over a grant of unani- THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE: Does mous consent for the consid- the gentleman from Texas desire to be eration of an appropriation heard on the point of order? MR. [GEORGE H.] MAHON [of Texas]: bill, unless the Committee on Mr. Speaker, on April 5, 1950, as Appropriations yields for shown at page 4835 of the daily record that purpose. of that day, the chairman of the Com- mittee on Appropriations, the gen- 14. 107 CONG. REC. 12905, 12906, 87th Cong. 1st Sess. 17. 96 CONG. REC. 6720–24, 81st Cong. 15. Sam Rayburn (Tex.). 2d Sess. 16. See 5 USC Sec. 912(a). 18. John W. McCormack (Mass.).

4853

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00081 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 7 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

tleman from Missouri [Mr. Cannon] essarily have to be passed until the asked and received unanimous consent 30th of June, but it is necessary that that the appropriation bill should have the 21 orders of the President be the right-of-way over other privileged brought before the House so they can business under the rules until disposi- be acted on by the twenty-fourth of tion, with the exception of conference this month, and it seems to me that reports. Therefore, I believe the reg- they ought to take precedence over any ular order would be to proceed with other bill. the further consideration of H.R. 7786. THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE: The Mr. Speaker, I believe that the gentleman has made a statement of Record would speak for itself. . . . fact, not a parliamentary inquiry. MR. [JOHN] TABER [of New York]: MR. [JOHN E.] RANKIN [of Mis- Under the established rules of practice sissippi]: Mr. Speaker, may I be heard of the House, when a special order like on the point of order? that is granted, like that which was THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE: The granted at the request of the gen- Chair will hear the gentleman. tleman from Missouri [Mr. Cannon], if MR. RANKIN: I was going to say that those in charge of the bill do not if this is of the highest constitutional present on any occasion a motion to go privilege it comes ahead of the present into Committee of the Whole, it is in legislation. order for the Speaker to recognize THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE: The other Members for other items that are Chair is prepared to rule. in order on the calendar. That does not The gentleman from Michigan deprive the holder of that special order makes a point of order, the substance of the right, when those items are dis- of which is that the motion he desires posed of, to move that the bill be con- to make or that someone else should sidered further in Committee of the make in relation to the consideration Whole. of a disapproving resolution of one of MR. [ROBERT F.] RICH [of Pennsyl- the reorganization plans takes prece- vania]: Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary dence over the appropriation bill inso- inquiry. far as recognition by the Chair is con- THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE: The cerned. The gentleman from Michigan gentleman will state it. raises a very serious question and the MR. RICH: If the 21 resolutions that Chair feels at this particular time that were presented to the House by the it is well that he did so. President, a great many of which have The question involved is not a con- been considered by the Committee on stitutional question but one relating to Expenditures in the Executive Depart- the rules of the House and to the Leg- ments—of which the chairman is a islative Reorganization Act of 1949 member, and which have been acted on which has been alluded to by the gen- by that committee—are not presented tleman from Michigan and other Mem- to the House before the twenty-fourth bers when addressing the Chair on of this month, they become law. The this point of order. The Chair calls at- general appropriation bill does not nec- tention to the language of paragraph

4854

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00082 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 7

(b) of section 201 of title II of the Reor- Mr. Speaker, on page 4835 of the ganization Act of 1949 which reads as daily Record of yesterday, the first follows: ‘‘with full recognition of the column carrying the special order made by the House last night reads constitutional right of either House to that the general appropriation bill change such rules so far as relating to shall be a special order privileged procedure in such House at any time above all other business of the House in the same manner and to the same under the rule until disposition. The extent as in the case of any other rule order made was until final disposition. I ask unanimous consent that of such House.’’ the Record and Journal be corrected It is very plain from that language to conform with the proceedings on that the intent of Congress was to rec- the floor of the House yesterday. ognize the reservation to each House of The Record further shows that the certain inherent powers which are nec- Speaker put the request and there was essary for either House to function to no objection. meet a particular situation or to carry MR. RANKIN: Mr. Speaker, a par- out its will. liamentary inquiry. On April 5, the gentleman from Mis- THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE: Let the souri [Mr. Cannon], chairman of the Chair finish. Committee on Appropriations, sub- MR. RANKIN: Mr. Speaker, I would mitted a unanimous-consent request to like to propound a parliamentary in- the House, which was granted, which quiry at this time. has the force of a rule, and which re- THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE: The lates to the rules of the House gov- Chair is in the process of making a rul- erning the consideration of the omni- ing. bus appropriation bill while it is before MR. RANKIN: That is the reason I the House and, of course, incidentally want to propound the inquiry right at affecting other legislation. The consent this point. request submitted by the gentleman THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE: The from Missouri was ‘‘that the general Chair recognizes the gentleman. appropriation bill for the fiscal year MR. RANKIN: We for the first time 1951 have right-of-way over all other this year have all the appropriations in privileged business under the rules one bill. Now, if they drag out consid- until disposition, with the exception of eration under the 5-minute rule be- conference reports.’’ yond the 24th, would that not shut the That request was granted by unani- Congress off entirely from voting on mous consent. On the next day the any of these recommendations? So we gentleman from Missouri [Mr. Can- do have a constitutional right to con- non], in correcting and interpreting the sider these propositions without having consent request granted on April 5, them smothered in this way. submitted a further unanimous-con- THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE: The sent request. Chair will state that the House always The daily Record shows, on page has a constitutional right and power to 4976, April 6, that the gentleman from refuse to go into the Committee of the Missouri [Mr. Cannon] said: Whole on any motion made by any

4855

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00083 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 7 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

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 sufference 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. consider the appropriation bill, that MR. HOFFMAN of Michigan: Mr. motion has preference over any other Speaker, a further point of order. preferential motion. It is a matter that THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE: The the House decides when the motion is gentleman will state it. made as to what it wants to do and it MR. HOFFMAN of Michigan: The has an opportunity when that motion point of order is the same as I raised is made to carry out its will. before; but, to keep the Record clear, I MR. [ARTHUR L.] MILLER of Ne- wish to make the same point of order braska: Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary regarding House Resolution 522, inquiry. House Resolution 545, and House Res- THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE: The olution 546, that is, that the House gentleman will state it. proceed to the consideration of each of MR. MILLER of Nebraska: I under- those resolutions in the order named, stood the statement of the gentleman assuming, of course, that the ruling from Missouri on April 6 was that the will be the same, but making a record. appropriation bill would take prece- THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE: The dence over all legislation and special Chair will reaffirm his ruling in rela- orders until entirely disposed of. Does tion to the several resolutions the gen- that include conference reports? tleman has referred to. THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE: A con- MR. [HERMAN P.] EBERHARTER [of ference report is in a privileged status Pennsylvania]: Mr. Speaker, a par- in any event. liamentary inquiry. MR. TABER: They were specifically THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE: The exempted. gentleman will state it. THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE: They MR. EBERHARTER: I believe I am cor- were specifically exempted. In relation rect, Mr. Speaker, in stating that since to the observation made by the gen- the unanimous-consent request of the tleman from Michigan [Mr. Hoffman] gentleman from Missouri [Mr. Cannon] that because other business has been was granted, that the House took up a brought up and that therefore con- measure under the new 21-day rule. I stitutes a violation of the unanimous- would like to know, Mr. Speaker,

4856

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00084 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 7

whether or not that was taken up be- matters having the highest privilege. cause of its high privilege or whether it According to the Record, he only made was taken up because of the sufference his request with respect to motions of the chairman of the Committee on having a high privilege. Appropriations, the gentleman from THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE: The Missouri (Mr. Cannon). unanimous-consent request, I might advise the gentleman from Pennsyl- THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE: The vania, appears in the Record of April 6, present occupant of the Chair, of that the general appropriation bill course, is unable to look into the mind shall be a special order privileged of the Speaker who was presiding at above all other business of the House the time. But from the knowledge that under the rule until disposition. The the Chair has, which, of course, is order made was ‘‘until final disposi- rather close, it was because the chair- tion.’’ man of the Committee on Appropria- tions permitted it to be done through § 7.15 The Speaker permitted sufference. In other words, if the chair- consideration and debate on man of the Committee on Appropria- a conference report to inter- tions had insisted on going into the vene between consideration Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union, and if the present of two resolutions dis- occupant of the chair had been pre- approving of two Presi- siding, there is nothing else that could dential reorganization plans have been done under the unanimous- where the original papers ac- consent request, in the Chair’s opinion, companying the conference but to recognize the motion. report were messaged from MR. EBERHARTER: A further parliamentary inquiry, Mr. Speaker. the Senate before consider- THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE: The ation of the second resolu- gentleman will state it. tion had begun. MR. EBERHARTER: As I understand On Sept. 28, 1970,(19) the the unanimous-consent request of the Speaker (1) recognized a Member gentleman from Missouri, it was that the appropriation bill would take pref- to call up a conference report on a erence over any other matters having a bill dealing with railroad safety high privilege. My understanding of (S. 1933) after consideration of the the new 21-day rule is that that is a first of two reorganization plans matter of the highest privilege, and and before debate was to begin on therefore I am wondering whether the the second.(2) He announced his same rule applies. intention to do so as follows: THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE: The gentleman is correct, but that rule can 19. 116 CONG. REC. 33870, 91st Cong. 2d be changed just like any other rule of Sess. the House can be changed. 1. John W. McCormack (Mass.). MR. EBERHARTER: But the gentleman 2. The House was considering H. Res. from Missouri did not insist on all 1209, disapproving of Reorganization

4857

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00085 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 7 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

The Chair has been informed and time equally between those for and understands that the original papers those against the pending resolution. on the next conference report have not The Parliamentarian advises the Chair been messaged over to the House as that those favoring the resolution have yet. They will be here shortly. 2 hours and 4 minutes and those op- The Chair will recognize the gen- posed to it have 1 hour and 56 min- tleman from California (Mr. Holifield) utes. Ordinarily, under the rules of the in connection with the first reorganiza- Senate, when a Senator is recognized tion plan, and if the papers [on the he may continue to address the Senate conference report] arrive between con- indefinitely. In this case, however, the sideration of the first and second reor- statute limits the time. Any Senator ganization plans, the Chair will recog- recognized now can continue until the nize the gentleman from West Virginia limitation of time for his side would at that time. take him from the floor. The Chair is going to recognize the Senator from Limitations on Time for Debate Vermont. He has 2 hours and 4 minutes on his side. When he ceases, some § 7.16 Debate on resolutions other Senator then will be recognized. disapproving reorganization The Chair thought he ought to make this statement, so that the Senate may plans is fixed by statute, and understand the parliamentary situa- the Senate rule relative to tion. the time for debate on usual propositions does not apply. § 7.17 By unanimous consent, On May 14, 1940,(3) the Senate debate on a resolution dis- considered a concurrent resolution approving Reorganization (S. Con. Res. 43) disapproving a Plan No. 1 of 1959, was lim- Presidential reorganization plan. ited to two hours in lieu of The Vice President (4) made the the 10 hours allowed under following statement: the Reorganization Act of 1949. Let the Chair make a statement with reference to the statutory and On July 1, 1959,(5) Mr. Neal parliamentary situation. The statute, Smith, of Iowa, asked unanimous as the Chair understands it, and as it consent that debate on House Res- was interpreted by the President pro olution 295 disapproving Reorga- tempore yesterday—and the Chair thinks he was correct—divides the nization Plan No. 1 of 1959 sched- uled for consideration on the fol- Plan No. 3 and H. Res. 1210, dis- lowing Monday be limited to two approving of Plan No. 4. hours, one-half of the time to be 3. 86 CONG. REC. 6027, 76th Cong. 3d Sess. 5. 105 CONG. REC. 12519, 86th Cong. 4. John N. Garner (Tex.). 1st Sess.

4858

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00086 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 7

controlled by the majority and lution back to the House with the rec- one-half of the time to be con- ommendation that it do pass. trolled by the minority. The motion was agreed to. There was no objection.(6) § 7.19 A resolution dis- § 7.18 A resolution disapproving a reorganization approving a reorganization plan of the President was, by plan was called up and de- unanimous consent, consid- bated for two hours in the ered in the House as in Com- Committee of the Whole mittee of the Whole, debated under a previous unanimous- for only five minutes, and consent agreement. passed. On July 6, 1959,(7) Mr. Dante B. On June 18, 1947,(10) the House Fascell, of Florida, moved that the considered a concurrent resolution House resolve itself under the disapproving Reorganization Plan Committee of the Whole House on No. 3 of the President. The pro- the state of the Union for the con- ceedings were as follows: sideration of the resolution (H. Res. 295) disapproving Reorga- REORGANIZATION PLAN NO. 3 nization Plan No. 1 of 1959. The MR. [CLARE E.] HOFFMAN [of Michi- proceedings in the Committee of gan]: Mr. Speaker, I move that the the Whole were as follows: House proceed to take up House Con- current Resolution 51, which does not THE CHAIRMAN: (8) Under the consent favor Reorganization Plan No. 3 of agreement of Wednesday, July 1,(9) 2 hours of general debate are allowed on May 27, 1947, and, pending that mo- the resolution, to be equally divided tion, I ask unanimous consent that the between the majority and the minority. resolution may be considered in the House as in the Committee of the At the conclusion of debate Mr. Whole and that general debate be lim- Fascell moved: ited to 5 minutes. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Com- THE SPEAKER: (11) Is there objection mittee do now rise and report the reso- to the request of the gentleman from Michigan? 6. Section 205 of the Reorganization There was no objection. Act of 1949 (63 Stat. 207, 5 USC The Clerk read the resolution, as fol- § 912) permits 10 hours of debate on lows: such a resolution. Resolved by the House of Rep- 7. 105 CONG. REC. 12740–46, 86th resentatives (the Senate concurring), Cong. 1st Sess. 8. Stewart L. Udall (Ariz.). 10. 93 CONG. REC. 7252, 80th Cong. 1st 9. 105 CONG. REC. 12519, 86th Cong. Sess. 1st Sess. 11. Joseph W. Martin, Jr. (Mass.).

4859

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00087 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 7 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

That the Congress does not favor the and that after debate the res- Reorganization Plan No. 3 of May 27, 1947, transmitted to Congress by olutions be voted on sepa- the President on the 27th day of rately. May 1947. On June 28, 1946,(12) Mr. Carter THE SPEAKER: The gentleman from Manasco, of Alabama, made the Michigan is recognized for 5 minutes. following unanimous-consent re- MR. HOFFMAN: Mr. Speaker, I understand there is no objection to this reso- quest regarding resolutions of dis- lution. approval of the President’s Reor- I yield to the gentleman from Ala- ganization Plans Nos. 1, 2, and 3: bama [Mr. Manasco], ranking minority member of the committee, to explain REORGANIZATION PLANS NO. 1, NO. 2, the resolution and any opposition, if AND NO. 3 any there be. MR. MANASCO: Mr. Speaker, I call up MR. [CARTER] MANASCO: Mr. Speak- House Concurrent Resolution 155, and er, a similar plan was sent up during I ask unanimous consent that House the Seventy-ninth Congress and re- Concurrent Resolutions 154 and 151 be jected by the House. considered; that the debate be limited This plan reorganizes the housing on the three resolutions to 3 hours, the agencies of the Government. Our com- time to be divided equally between my- mittee thinks these agencies should be self and the ranking minority member reorganized but we do not think the of the Committee on Expenditures in lending and insuring agencies should the Executive Departments; that after be placed in the same organization 3 hours of general debate on the reso- with the construction agency. lutions, the resolutions be voted on I have no requests for time on this separately. side. That is the only issue involved. MR. [JOSEPH W.] MARTIN [Jr.] of MR. HOFFMAN: Mr. Speaker, I have Massachusetts: Mr. Speaker, reserving no further requests for time. the right to object, as I understand it, I move the previous question on the in these 3 hours a Member may talk resolution. about any one of the three resolutions. The previous question was ordered. THE SPEAKER: (13) That is correct. The resolution was agreed to. MR. MARTIN of Massachusetts: And that at the end of general debate the § 7.20 In considering three res- resolutions will be voted on separately. olutions disapproving three MR. MANASCO: Each resolution sepa- reorganization plans of the rately. President, the House agreed Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous con- by unanimous consent that sent also that the plans be voted on in

the three resolutions be con- 12. 92 CONG. REC. 7886, 79th Cong. 2d sidered together, that debate Sess. be limited to three hours, 13. Sam Rayburn (Tex.). 4860

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00088 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 7

their order, plan 1 first; plan 2, second; ered in the House as in the Com- and plan 3, third. mittee as the Whole. MR. [WILLIAM A.] PITTENGER [of (15) Minnesota]: Mr. Speaker, reserving the THE SPEAKER: Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from right to object, it is the resolutions that Illinois? must be voted on. There was no objection. MR. MANASCO: That is correct. THE SPEAKER: The question is on the MR. [JOHN W.] MCCORMACK [of Mas- resolution. sachusetts]: Reserving the right to ob- The question was taken. ject, the gentlemen have agreed on THE SPEAKER: In the opinion of the time, which is very satisfactory. The Chair, the resolution having received only suggestion I have to make is that an affirmative vote of a majority of the I hope they do not use the entire 3 authorized membership of the House, hours. the resolution is agreed to.(16) THE SPEAKER: The gentleman from Alabama ask unanimous consent that Control of Time in Opposition there be 3 hours of general debate on these resolutions, at the end of which § 7.22 The Member calling up a time the resolutions are to be voted on resolution disapproving a re- separately in this order: Plan No. 1, organization plan announced plan No. 2, and plan No. 3. that the majority and minor- Is there objection? There was no objection. ity members of the Com- mittee on Government Oper- Consideration Without Debate ations (both in favor of the plan) would yield half of § 7.21 A resolution dis- their time to Members op- approving a reorganization posed to the resolution, who plan was considered in the would in turn control the House as in the Committee of time in opposition. the Whole by unanimous con- On Aug. 9, 1967,(17) the House sent and agreed to by voice resolved itself into the Committee vote without debate. of the Whole House on the state of On July 15, 1956,(14) Mr. Wil- liam L. Dawson, of Illinois, asked 15. Sam Rayburn (Tex.). 16. A similar procedure was employed to unanimous consent that House adopt a resolution (H. Res. 541) dis- Resolution 534 disapproving Reor- approving Reorganization Plan No. 2 ganization Plan No. 1 be consid- of 1956. See 102 CONG. REC. 11886, 84th Cong. 2d Sess., July 5, 1956. 14. 102 CONG. REC. 11886, 84th Cong. 17. 113 CONG. REC. 21941, 90th Cong. 2d Sess. 1st Sess.

4861

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00089 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 7 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

the Union for the consideration of The majority on our side have done House Resolution 512 dis- the same thing, to allocate 1 hour to approving Reorganization Plan the proponents and 1 hour to the opponents. No. 3 of 1967. The Chairman (18) The time for the opponents on the then made the following an- majority side will be handled by the nouncement: gentleman from Virginia [Mr. Hardy], Under the unanimous-consent agree- and I shall handle the time for the pro- ment of Thursday, August 3, 1967, ponents. general debate on the resolution will I understand the gentleman from Il- continue for not to exceed 4 hours, to linois [Mr. Erlenborn] will handle the be equally divided and controlled by time on the minority side for the pro- the gentleman from Minnesota [Mr. ponents on their side and the gen- Blatnik] and the gentlewoman from tleman from Minnesota [Mr. Nelsen] New Jersey [Mrs. Dwyer]. will handle the time for the oppo- The Chair recognizes the gentleman nents.(19) from Minnesota. . . . MR. [PORTER] HARDY [Jr., of Vir- Amendment of Resolution ginia]: I wonder if we could have an understanding now so that there will § 7.23 A motion that the Com- not be any confusion as to how the mittee of the Whole rise and time will be divided. I am sure the gentleman from Minnesota has already report a resolution to dis- indicated what he plans to do, but I approve a reorganization think it might be well if we had that plan back to the House, with cleared up now, if the gentleman would the recommendation that the not mind? enacting clause be stricken MR. [JOHN A.] BLATNIK: I will be pleased to do so and I think the gen- out, was held not in order on tleman has made a very proper re- the ground that there would quest. be no amendment stage dur- What we have done by agreement of ing which to offer the mo- the leadership on both sides of the House, and by agreement with the mation. jority and minority leadership of the On June 27, 1953,(20) during House Committee on Government Op- consideration in the Committee of erations and of the Committee on the District of Columbia is that we have the Whole of a resolution (H. Res. agreed to divide the time equally between the proponents and the oppo- 19. Under the law debate on a resolution nents as follows: disapproving a reorganization plan is The minority will divide their time divided equally between the pro- with 1 hour allocated to the opponents ponents and opponents of the resolu- and 1 hour for the proponents. tion. 5 USC § 912(b). 20. 99 CONG. REC. 7482, 83d Cong. 1st 18. William L. Hungate (Mo.). Sess.

4862

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00090 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 7

295) disapproving Reorganization state of the Union considered a Plan No. 6, Mr. W. Sterling Cole, resolution (H. Res. 530) dis- of New York, made the following approving Reorganization Plan motion: No. 1 transmitted to the Congress Mr. Chairman, I offer a preferential by the President on Jan. 30, 1962, motion. and reported the resolution back The Clerk read as follows: to the House with the rec- Mr. Cole of New York moves that ommendation that it not be the Committee do now rise with the agreed to. recommendation that the enacting The Speaker (4) ordered the reso- clause be stricken. lution read by the Clerk and an- MR. [CLARE E.] HOFFMAN [of Michi- nounced that the question was on gan]: Mr. Chairman, I make the point the adoption of the resolution. of order that the motion is not in order. THE CHAIRMAN: (1) The Chair is com- Voting on Resolutions of Dis- pelled to agree with the gentleman approval from Michigan. The resolution is not amendable and, therefore, the pref- § 7.25 An affirmative vote of a (2) erential motion is not in order. majority of the authorized House Consideration of Report membership of the House is of Committee of the Whole required to adopt a resolution disapproving a reorga- § 7.24 When the Committee of nization plan of the Presi- the Whole has reported back dent, and such vote may be to the House its rec- had by viva voce, by division, ommendation regarding the or by the yeas and nays. adoption or rejection of a On Aug. 11, 1949,(5) during con- resolution disapproving a re- sideration in the House of a reso- organization plan, the ques- lution (H. Res. 301) disapproving tion in the House recurs on Reorganization Plan No. 2 of 1949 the adoption of the resolu- and adversely reported from the tion of disapproval and not Committee on Expenditures in the on concurring in the commit- Executive Departments, Mr. tee’s recommendation. Charles A. Halleck, of Indiana, raised a parliamentary inquiry: On Feb. 21, 1962, (3) the Com- mittee of the Whole House on the Further, Mr. Speaker, do I understand correctly that under the terms of 1. Leslie C. Arends (Ill.). 2. See 5 U.S.C. 912(b). 4. John W. McCormack (Mass.). 3. 108 CONG. REC. 2679, 2680, 87th 5. 95 CONG. REC. 11314, 81st Cong. 1st Cong. 2d Sess. Sess.

4863

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00091 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 7 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

the Reorganization Act under which the House, the resolution is not agreed we are operating the proponents of the to. resolution who by that resolution So the resolution was rejected. would seek to disapprove Reorganiza- tion Plan No. 2 would have to have 218 Rejection by House as Affecting votes actually present and voting in Senate Action order to carry the resolution? THE SPEAKER: (6) That is correct; that § 7.26 Where the House dis- is the law, and the Chair will take this agrees to a reorganization opportunity to read the law: plan submitted by the Presi- Sec. 6. (a) Except as may be other- dent, it notifies the Senate of wise provided pursuant to subsection (c) of this section, the provisions of its action, and the Senate the reorganization plan shall take ef- may indefinitely postpone fect upon the expiration of the first period of 60 calendar days of contin- further consideration of a uous session of the Congress, fol- resolution disapproving the lowing the date on which the plan is same reorganization plan. transmitted to it; but only if, between the date of transmittal and On July 20, 1961,(7) there was the expiration of such 60-day period there has not been passed by either received in the Senate a message of the two Houses by the affirmative from the House announcing that vote of a majority of the authorized the House had agreed to a resolu- membership of that House, a resolution stating in substance that that tion (H. Res. 328) disapproving House does not favor the reorganiza- Reorganization Plan No. 5 trans- tion plan. mitted to Congress by the Presi- MR. [CLARENCE J.] BROWN of Ohio: dent on May 24, 1961. Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary inquiry. Senator Mike Mansfield, of THE SPEAKER: The gentleman will Montana, subsequently moved state it. that Senate Resolution 158, dis- MR. BROWN of Ohio: How will the approving Reorganization Plan Chair determine whether there are 218 No. 5, be indefinitely postponed. votes cast in favor of the resolution? The motion was agreed to.(8) THE SPEAKER: By the usual method: Either by a viva voce vote, division § 7.27 The House having vote, or a vote by the yeas and nays. The question is on the resolution. agreed to a resolution dis- The question was taken. approving a reorganization THE SPEAKER: In the opinion of the plan, the Senate Committee Chair the resolution not having re- on Government Operations ceived the affirmative vote of a majority of the authorized membership of 7. 107 CONG. REC. 13017, 87th Cong. 1st Sess. 6. Sam Rayburn (Tex.). 8. Id. at p. 13027.

4864

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00092 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 8

ordered reported, without I thought it proper to make this an- recommendation, a resolu- nouncement in view of the fact that the committee had voted to report the tion to the same effect. resolution as I have indicated. On June 16, 1961,(9) Senator John L. McClellan, of Arkansas, made the following statement in § 8. Resolutions of Inquiry the Senate: (10) Mr. President, on June 13, 1961, the The resolution of inquiry is a Committee on Government Operations, simple resolution making a direct in executive session, ordered reported, request or demand of the Presi- without recommendations, S. Res. 142, dent or the head of an executive expressing disapproval of Reorganiza- department to furnish the House tion Plan No. 2 of 1961. of Representatives with specific Under section 6 of the Reorganiza- factual information in the posses- tion Act of 1949, as amended, a reorga- sion of the executive branch. The nization plan may not become effective if a resolution of disapproval is adopt- practice is nearly as old as the Re- (11) ed by a simple majority of either public, and is based on prin- House. On June 15, 1961, the House of ciples of comity between the exec- Representatives adopted House Resolu- utive and legislative branches tion 303, to disapprove Reorganization rather than on any specific provi- Plan No. 2 of 1961. Since this action sion of the Constitution that a results in the final disposition of the federal court may be called upon matter, it is no longer necessary either to enforce. for the Committee on Government Op- erations to file a report on S. Res. 142, The resolution of inquiry is or for the Senate to take any further privileged, i.e. it may be consid- action. ered at any time after it is prop- I call attention to the fact, however, erly reported or discharged from that hearings on that resolution have committee.(12) been held and will be available shortly The resolution must be directed for the information of Members of the to the President or the head of an Senate. Legislation to enact certain (13) provisions of Reorganization Plan No. executive department, and it 2 is now pending before the Senate Committee on Commerce—S. 2034— 10. See also Ch. 15, Investigations and and the House Committee on Inter- Inquiries, supra. state and Foreign Commerce—H.R. 11. See 3 Hinds’ Precedents Sec. 1856 et 7333—and the House committee has seq. now completed hearings on H.R. 7333. 12. See 8.6, infra. 13. 3 Hinds’ Precedents §§ 1861–1864; 9. 107 CONG. REC. 10628, 87th Cong. and 6 Cannon’s Precedents § Sec. 1st Sess. 406.

4865

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00093 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 8 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

must call for the reporting of facts Republics of Brazil and Columbia within their knowledge or control. to ratify certain trade agreements. If it calls for an opinion (14) or an The resolution was referred to investigation,(15) the resolution the Committee on Ways and does not enjoy a privileged status. Means.

f Scope of Inquiry; Soliciting Committee Jurisdiction Opinions § 8.1 When introduced, resolu- § 8.2 A resolution of inquiry tions of inquiry are referred seeking an opinion rather to the committee having ju- than a recital of facts from risdiction over the type of in- the head of an executive de- formation or program at partment is not privileged which the resolution is di- and is therefore not subject rected. to a motion to discharge. On July 7, 1971,(17) Ms. Bella S. Resolutions of inquiry di- Abzug, of New York, moved to dis- recting the Secretary of charge the Committee on Armed State to transmit information Services from further consider- touching the ratification of ation of House Resolution 491, a certain trade agreements privileged resolution of inquiry: come within the jurisdiction Resolved, That the President, the of the Committee on Ways Secretary of State, Secretary of De- and Means. fense, and the Director of the Central (16) Intelligence Agency be, and they are On June 3, 1935, Mr. Harold hereby, directed to furnish the House Knutson, of Minnesota, introduced of Representatives within fifteen days a resolution of inquiry (H. Res. after the adoption of this resolution 236) directing the Secretary of with full and complete information on State to transmit to the House of the following— Representatives information the history and rationale for United States involvement in South Vietnam touching upon the failure of the since the completion of the study entitled ‘‘United States—Vietnam Rela- 14. See § 8.3, infra. tionships, 1945–1967’’, prepared by the 15. 3 Hinds’ Precedents §§ 1872–1874; Vietnam Task Force, Office of the Sec- and 6 Cannon’s Precedents §§ 422, retary of Defense; 427, 429, 432. 16. 79 CONG. REC. 8604, 74th Cong. 1st 17. 117 CONG. REC. 23810, 23811, 92d Sess. Cong. 1st Sess.

4866

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00094 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 8

the known existing plans for residual Any resolution asking for a deter- force of the United States Armed mination of ‘‘capacity’’ and asking for Forces in South Vietnam; ‘‘analyses’’ of past and present military the nature and capacity of the gov- capabilities asks for opinions, and thus ernment of the Republic of Vietnam in- destroys the privileged nature of the cluding but not limited to analyses of resolution. I refer to volume 3, Can- their past and present military capa- non’s Precedents, section 1873. bilities, their capacity for military and And finally, Mr. Speaker, there can economic self-sufficiency including but be no question that a resolution which not limited to analyses of the political asks for the ‘‘rationale’’ for U.S. in- base of the Republic, the scope, if any, volvement in South Vietnam most as- of governmental malfunction and cor- suredly seeks an opinion. Webster’s ruption, the depth of popular support Dictionary defines the word rationale and procedures for dealing with non- as: support; including but not limited to An explanation of controlling prin- known existing studies of the economy ciples of opinion, belief, practice or of the Republic of South Vietnam and phenomena. the internal workings of the govern- I make the further point of order, ment of the Republic of South Viet- Mr. Speaker, that the resolution is not nam; confined to heads of departments or the plans and procedures, both on the President but also includes the the part of the Republic of South Viet- head of an agency and, therefore, the nam and the United States Govern- resolution is not privileged. ment for the November 1971 elections Mr. Speaker, I press the point of in the Republic of South Vietnam, in- order. cluding but not limited to analyses of THE SPEAKER: (18) The Chair is pre- the United States involvement, covert pared to rule. . . . or not, in said elections. It has been consistently held that to Mr. F. Edward Hebert, of Lou- retain the privilege under the rule, res- isiana, raised a point of order: olutions of inquiry must call for facts rather than opinions—Cannon’s prece- Mr. Speaker, the resolution calls for dents, volume VI page 413 and pages opinions and under the rule the resolu- 418 to 432. Speaker Longworth, on tion of inquiry must seek facts, not February 11, 1926, held that a resolu- opinions. The resolution obviously re- tion inquiring for such facts as would quires an opinion when it asks for ‘‘the inevitably require the statement of an nature and capacity of the Government opinion to answer such inquiry was not of the Republic of Vietnam.’’ It also privileged—Record, page 3805. asks for opinion when it seeks analyses Among other requests, House Reso- of the past and present military capa- lution 491 calls for the furnishing of bilities of the Republic of Vietnam. It one, the ‘‘rationale’’ for U.S. involve- clearly asks for opinion when it seeks ment in South Vietnam since the com- ‘‘the depth of popular support,’’ of the South Vietnamese Government. 18. Carl Albert (Okla.).

4867

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00095 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 8 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

pletion of the study; two, the nature On Feb. 9, 1950,(1) the Com- and ‘‘capacity’’ of the Government of mittee on Foreign Affairs reported the Republic of Vietnam, including ‘‘analyses’’ of their military ‘‘capabili- unfavorably a resolution of in- ties’’; their capacity for self-sufficiency quiry (H. Res. 452) requesting cer- which would include analyses of the tain information from the Presi- Government’s political base, the scope dent regarding American foreign of malfunction and corruption, the depth of popular support; and three, policy in the Far East. The com- analyses of U.S. involvement in 1971 mittee had received responses to elections in South Vietnam. the resolution from the Depart- In at least these particulars, execu- ment of State which it determined tive officials are called upon—not for sufficient for purposes of the reso- facts—but to furnish conclusions, which must be, essentially, statements lution. The Chairman of the com- of opinion. mittee, John Kee, of West Vir- The Chair therefore holds that ginia, moved that the resolution House Resolution 491 is not a privi- be laid on the table. leged resolution within the meaning of clause 5, rule XXII, and that the mo- The replies of the Department tion to discharge the Committee on of State were to be printed in the Armed Services from its further con- committee report accompanying sideration is not in order. the resolution, but the report had not yet been printed at the time Reporting Resolutions of In- the resolution was being consid- quiry ered in the House. Mr. John Phil- § 8.3 Resolutions of inquiry lips, of California, raised a ques- must be reported back to the tion pending the motion to lay on House by committee within the table as to why the committee the time period specified in report was not available: the rule (Rule XXII clause 5), That is a proper question. When are and if the resolution is not the replies going to be printed? Why reported by the committee were they not printed before the resolution was brought up and, as the gen- within the time limit, it may tleman from Illinois said, why were be called up in the House as they not printed before the discussion a matter of privilege. of the Korea-Formosa aid? Parliamentarian’s Note: From MR. KEE: Under the rule, we have to the inception of the rule in 1879, report these resolutions to the House, with the action of the committee on the time period for committee ac- them, within 7 days. It took quite some tion was set at seven legislative days. In the 98th Congress, the 1. 96 CONG. REC. 1755, 81st Cong. 2d period was set at 14 days. Sess. 4868

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00096 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 8

time for us to get the answers back Extension of Reporting Date from the Department. We reported them at the earliest possible time. § 8.4 The House has by unani- They would have been reported on yes- mous consent extended the terday had that day not been Calendar time in which a resolution of Wednesday. inquiry must be reported to MR. PHILLIPS of California: That does not reply to my question, or, rath- the House. er, it is a reply, but it is not, perhaps, On Feb. 11, 1952,(4) Mr. John a satisfactory reply because the com- W. McCormack, of Massachusetts, mittee did not have to bring up this asked unanimous consent that resolution until after they were printed. notwithstanding the provisions of THE SPEAKER: (2) A parliamentary Rule XXII clause 5, requiring a re- question is involved there with which port within one week on a resolu- the gentleman is perhaps not familiar. tion of inquiry, the Committee on MR. PHILLIPS of California: Would Foreign Affairs may have until the Speaker care to enlighten me on Wednesday, Feb. 20, 1952, to file the parliamentary question? a report on House Resolution 514. THE SPEAKER: It is that if the com- There was no objection. mittee does not report the resolution within 7 days, the gentleman from Privileged Status Connecticut may call it up. MR. PHILLIPS of California: Is the § 8.5 Parliamentarian’s Note: A Speaker saying that the report had to resolution of inquiry re- be acted upon in 7 days? ported from a committee is THE SPEAKER: By the committee or by the House. If the committee does called up as a privileged mat- not report it within seven legislative ter and is debatable under days, the gentleman from Connecticut the hour rule. can call it up. The committee has con- (5) sidered it, so the gentleman from West On Sept. 16, 1965, Mr. James Virginia has said. The committee has H. Morrison, of Louisiana, offered the answers. It considered them, and it a privileged resolution (H. Res. took action. The gentleman has now reported this resolution unfavorably rule, which is found in Rule XI and is going to move to lay it on the clause 2(l)(6) Sec. 715 in the 1981 table. That is the usual course. It is House Rules and Manual) to com- done many times every year.(3) mittee reports on resolutions of inquiry. 2. Sam Rayburn (Tex.). 4. 98 CONG. REC. 960, 82d Cong. 2d 3. See §§ 8.12–8.14, infra, regarding the Sess. applicability of Rule XI clause 5. 111 CONG. REC. 24030, 89th Cong. 27(d)(4) (the three-day availability 1st Sess.

4869

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00097 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 8 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

574) reported from the Committee and referred to the House Cal- on Post Office and Civil Service endar and ordered to be printed.(8) directing the Postmaster General to furnish the House of Represent- § 8.7 Consideration of a resolu- atives with the names of all per- tion of inquiry does not take sons employed by the Post Office precedence over the call of Department as temporary employ- the Private Calendar. ees at any time during the period On Aug. 3, 1971,(9) F. Edward beginning on May 23, 1965, and He´bert, of Louisiana, Chairman of ending on Sept. 6, 1965. Mr. Mor- the Committee on Armed Serv- rison asked for the immediate ices, raised the following par- consideration of the resolution, liamentary inquiry shortly after and the Chair recognized him for the convening of the House on one hour. that day: The House subsequently agreed It is my intention to send to the desk a privileged resolution, and I intend to to a motion offered by Mr. Morri- make a motion to table the resolution, son to lay this resolution on the which has an adverse report from the table.(6) Committee on Armed Services. The parliamentary inquiry that I desire to Calendars make is, am I permitted, after sending the privileged resolution to the desk § 8.6 Resolutions of inquiry, for consideration, to allow its intro- ducer to speak without losing my privi- when reported from com- lege to move immediately to table? mittee, may be referred to the appropriate calendar 8. Parliamentarian’s Note: Rule XXII rather than be considered clause 5 provides that resolutions of immediately. inquiry shall be reported to the House within one week after presen- On July 1, 1971,(7) four resolu- tation. If the committee does not re- tions of inquiry (H. Res. 492, 493, port within that time, a motion to 494, and 495) directing the Sec- discharge the committee from fur- retary of State to furnish the ther consideration of the resolution becomes privileged. Once the com- House with information regarding mittee reports, however, the com- American activity in Southeast mittee chairman is recognized over Asia were reported adversely from all other members to call up the res- the Committee on Foreign Affairs olution even though the committee has reported adversely in order to 6. Id. at p. 24033. prevent a motion to discharge. 7. 117 CONG. REC. 23211, 92d Cong. 1st 9. 117 CONG. REC. 29060, 92d Cong. 1st Sess. Sess.

4870

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00098 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 8

THE SPEAKER: (10) The gentleman will to any agreements made by the be recognized on the resolution. The President of the United States gentleman will be privileged to yield. and the Prime Minister of Great ´ MR. HEBERT: I shall be able to yield Britain during their recent con- without losing my right? versations. Mr. Richards then THE SPEAKER. The gentleman can yield for debate purposes. moved that the resolution be laid MR. HE´ BERT: At any time after I on the table. yield I can move to table? Mr. Charles A. Halleck, of Indi- THE SPEAKER: The gentleman is cor- ana, raised a parliamentary in- rect. quiry: MR. HE´ BERT: Then, Mr. Speaker, I shall send to the desk a privileged res- Mr. Speaker, this is a matter of very olution and ask for its immediate con- considerable importance. Does the sideration. making of this motion at this time pre- clude all debate, or may we expect that THE SPEAKER: Will the gentleman the chairman of the Committee on For- withhold that request inasmuch as the eign Affairs will yield time to those Private Calendar must be called ahead who may want to discuss this matter? of legislative business? THE SPEAKER: (12) The motion to lay MR. HE´ BERT: Certainly, sir. on the table is not debatable. The gentleman from South Carolina cannot § 8.8 A motion to lay on the yield time after he has made a motion table a resolution of inquiry to lay on the table. is not debatable, and if such The motion to lay on the table motion, when offered by the was defeated. Member in charge, is decided Mr. John M. Vorys, of Ohio, adversely, the right to prior having voted against the motion recognition passes to the to lay on the table on a yea and Member leading the opposi- nay vote, then asked recognition tion to the motion. to speak in opposition. The Chair On Feb. 20, 1952,(11) Mr. James recognized him for one hour. Mr. P. Richards, of South Carolina, by Richards then raised a parliamen- direction of the Committee on For- tary inquiry: eign Affairs, called up a privileged Would the Speaker explain the par- resolution (H. Res. 514) directing liamentary situation as to who is in the Secretary of State to transmit charge of the time? to the House information relating THE SPEAKER: The gentleman from Ohio is in charge of the time, the gen- 10. Carl Albert (Okla.). tleman being with the majority in this 11. 98 CONG. REC. 1205–16, 82d Cong. 2d Sess. 12. Sam Rayburn (Tex.).

4871

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00099 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 8 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

instance, and on that side of the issue dered. Mr. Thomas P. O’Neill, Jr., which received the most votes. The of Massachusetts, then raised a gentleman from Ohio is recognized. parliamentary inquiry: Application of 40-minute Rule Mr. Speaker, a parlimentary inquiry: for Debate In view of the fact that there was no debate on this, is a Member entitled to § 8.9 When a motion to dis- 20 minutes if he asks for time? charge a committee from fur- THE SPEAKER: (14) He is. ther consideration of a reso- MR. O’NEILL: Mr. Speaker, I am asking for the 20 minutes. I have some lution of inquiry has been questions I would like to ask on this agreed to and the previous and have the chairman of the Com- question has been ordered mittee on Education and Labor explain on the resolution without in- it. tervening debate, the 40- MR. [DURWARD G.] HALL [of Mis- minute rule may be invoked, souri]: Mr. Speaker, has not the previous question been moved and accept- allotting 20 minutes each to ed? those supporting and oppos- THE SPEAKER: Yes, it has. ing the resolution. MR. O’NEILL: Mr. Speaker, I was on On Aug. 2, 1971,(13) the House my feet seeking recognition. voted to discharge the Committee MR. HALL: Regular order, Mr. Speak- on Education and Labor from fur- er. ther consideration of a resolution THE SPEAKER: Inasmuch as there of inquiry (H. Res. 539) directing has been no debate on the resolution, the 40-minute rule applies, 20 minutes the Secretary of Health, Edu- to each side. The gentleman from cation, and Welfare to provide the Texas is entitled to 20 minutes and the House with documents listing the gentleman from Massachusetts is enti- public school systems in the tled to 20 minutes. United States that receive federal money and that would be engaged Publication of Answers to In- in busing to achieve racial balance quiries during the school year 1971–72. Upon the adoption of the motion § 8.10 When a resolution of in- to discharge, Mr. James M. Col- quiry is referred to a com- lins, of Texas, moved the previous mittee, the committee may question on the resolution, and proceed immediately to di- the previous question was or- rect the inquiries contained therein to the President or to 13. 117 CONG. REC. 28863, 28864, 92d Cong. 1st Sess. 14. Carl Albert (Okla.).

4872

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00100 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 8

the head of the executive and complete answer to all the questions in the resolution. These answers agency named in the resolu- will all be published in the report tion, and when the com- which the committee has brought in mittee receives a reply that with the resolution, with the exception of two supplemental answers which it satisfies the terms of the res- is deemed to be incompatible with the olution, it may report the public interest to publish. But the two resolution unfavorably to the supplemental answers will be kept on file with the committee and be avail- House and publish the unable for the information of members of classified responses obtained the committee. according to the terms of the Accompanying the resolution is an resolution in the committee adverse report by the committee. Mr. Speaker, I now yield to the gen- report accompanying the res- tleman from Connecticut [Mr. Lodge], olution and permit Members a member of our committee and the author of the resolution, 5 minutes in access to classified responses which he desires to make a statement. in possession of the com- Mr. John Davis Lodge, of Con- mittee. necticut, then proceeded to sum- On Feb. 9, 1950,(15) John Kee, of marize his recollections of the con- West Virginia, Chairman of the tents of the response to the reso- Committee on Foreign Affairs, re- lution received by the committee ported from the committee and from the Department of State. was granted immediate consider- At the conclusion of Mr. Lodge’s ation of a privileged resolution of remarks, Mr. Kee made the following statement and motion: inquiry (H. Res. 452) requesting of the President, ‘‘if not incompatible Mr. Speaker, a few words only in reply to the gentleman from Con- with the public interest,’’ informa- necticut. The resolution together with tion on American foreign policy in the reply of the Department of State, the Far East. was submitted to the committee, read to the committee, was passed upon by Mr. Kee made the following re- the committee, deemed satisfactory, marks regarding the resolution: and the committee reported out the resolution adversely. Mr. Speaker, when this resolution I therefore move that the resolution was referred to the Committee on For- be laid on the table. eign Affairs we immediately put it into proper channels in order that the var- The motion was agreed to. ious inquiries made in the resolution might be answered. We have received Referral of Executive Re- through the Department of State a full sponses to Committee

15. 96 CONG. REC. 1753–55, 81st Cong. § 8.11 Communications from 2d Sess. heads of executive depart- 4873

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00101 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 8 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

ments in reply to resolutions eign Affairs and ordered to be of inquiry adopted in the printed.(18) House are laid before the House, and referred to the Discharge by Committee committee having jurisdiction. § 8.12 Where a resolution of in- On Mar. 5, 1952,(16) the Speak- quiry had been pending be- er (17) laid before the House the fore a committee for more following communication from the than seven legislative days Secretary of State in response to a and that committee had then resolution of inquiry (H. Res. 514) ordered the resolution ad- adopted by the House directing versely reported but had not the Secretary of State to transmit filed a written report there- to the House information relating on, the committee was ‘‘dis- to any agreement made by the charged’’ from consideration President of the United States of the resolution upon its and the Prime Minister of Great presentation to the House as Britain during their recent con- privileged when no point of versations: order was raised. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, D.C., March 4, 1952. 18. For other examples, (1) report from The Honorable SAM RAYBURN, Department of State on effect on do- Speaker of the House of mestic fisheries of increased imports Representatives. in response to H. Res. 147, referred MY DEAR MR. SPEAKER: I have been to the Committee on Merchant Ma- directed by the President to acknowl- rine and Fisheries, 95 CONG. REC. edge receipt of House Resolution 514, 6372, 81st Cong. 1st Sess., Mar. 17, and to call attention to his statement 1949; (2) report from the Depart- of February 20, when, at his press con- ment of the Interior on national en- ference, he responded to the question ergy supplies and suggested govern- ‘‘Have any commitments been made to ment conservation programs in re- Great Britain on sending troops any- sponse to H. Res. 385, referred to the where?’’ by a categorical ‘‘No.’’ Committee on Public Lands, 94 Sincerely yours, CONG. REC. 5163, 80th Cong. 2d DEAN ACHESON. Sess., Apr. 30, 1948; and (3) report The letter was read and re- from the Department of Commerce ferred to the Committee on For- on total U.S. exports in reponse to H. Res. 366, referred to the Committee 16. 98 CONG. REC. 1892, 82d Cong. 2d on Interstate and Foreign Com- Sess. merce, 94 CONG. REC. 39, 80th Cong. 17. Sam Rayburn (Tex.). 2d Sess., Jan. 8, 1948.

4874

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00102 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 8

On Aug. 3, 1971,(19) F. Edward then, if the motion is successful, He´bert, of Louisiana, Chairman of moving to lay the resolution on the Committee on Armed Services the table. This procedure also sent to the desk from that com- avoids the three-day requirement mittee a resolution of inquiry (H. which is likewise applicable only Res. 557) directing the Secretary to reported resolutions. of Defense to furnish to the House ‘‘. . . any documents regarding all Time for Consideration of Re- forms of United States military port aid extended to the so-called For- § 8.13 Parliamentarian’s Note: ward-Defense . . .’’ nations. No A resolution of inquiry re- written report was filed with the ported by a committee would resolution. Mr. He´bert’s subse- ordinarily be subject to the quent motion to table the resolu- provisions of the rule that a tion was agreed to. resolution is not privileged Parliamentarian’s Note: The until the report has been Journal (H. Jour. 960 [1971]) cor- available for three calendar rectly indicates the discharge of days; when no point of order the Committee on Armed Services is raised, however, the House from consideration of House Reso- may proceed to consider lution 557, there being no written such a resolution on the day report thereon. The provisions of reported. Rule XI clause 2(l)(6), House Rules (20) and Manual § 715 (1981) requir- On June 30, 1971, F. Edward He´bert, of Louisiana, Chairman of ing the availability of committee the Committee on Armed Serv- reports for three calendar days ices, reported from the committee are applicable to reported resolu- and called up as privileged a reso- tions of inquiry. It is apparent, lution of inquiry (H. Res. 489) di- since this resolution was not tech- recting the President to present to nically reported, that a committee the House a copy of the report en- can maintain control over a reso- titled ‘‘United States-Vietnam Re- lution of inquiry after seven legis- lationships, 1945–1967’’ prepared lative days, even though it does by the Vietnam Task Force, office not meet to consider the resolu- of the Secretary of Defense. tion, by its chairman offering a Mr. He´bert immediately moved privileged motion to discharge and to lay the resolution on the table,

19. 117 CONG. REC. 29060, 29063, 92d 20. 117 CONG. REC. 23030, 92d Cong. 1st Cong. 1st Sess. Sess.

4875

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00103 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 8 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

and the motion was agreed to was granted unanimous consent without objection being made that for the immediate consideration of consideration of the resolution the resolution. was not privileged for failure to Mr. He´bert proceeded to outline comply with Rule XI clause the information received by the 27(d)(4) (Rule XI clause 2(l)(6) committee in response to the reso- § 715 in the 1981 House Rules and lution. He then moved to lay the resolution on the table, and the Manual). motion was agreed to.

Consideration by Unanimous Inspection of Reports Consent § 8.15 Inspection of reports § 8.14 The Chairman of the from governmental depart- Committee on Armed Serv- ments submitted in connec- ices reported adversely a tion with a resolution of in- privileged resolution of inquiry was formerly within quiry, then obtained unani- the discretion of the com- mous consent for its imme- mittee having possession. diate consideration [thereby Currently, all Members are waiving the three-day avail- given access to committee ability requirement for com- files. mittee reports under Rule XI On Feb. 7, 1939,(1) Mr. Sol clause 2(l)(6), House Rules Bloom, of New York, called up as and Manual § 715 (1981)] and a privileged matter a resolution of then moved to lay the resolu- inquiry (H. Res. 78) reported by tion on the table. the Committee on Foreign Affairs On May 9, 1973,(21) F. Edward requesting information of the He´bert, of Louisiana, Chairman of State Department on Mexican relations with the recommendation the Committee on Armed Serv- that it do not pass since ‘‘Such in- ices, reported adversely from the formation available to the Depart- committee a privileged resolution ment of State as is consistent with of inquiry (H. Res. 379) directing the public interest has been fur- the Secretary of Defense to supply nished your committee and is on the House with information re- file.’’ garding American military activ- Mr. Hamilton Fish, Jr., of New ity in Laos. Mr. He´bert asked and York, raised a parliamentary in-

21. 119 CONG. REC. 14990–94, 93d Cong. 1. 84 CONG. REC. 1181, 1182, 76th 1st Sess.; H. Jour. 657 (1973). Cong. 1st Sess.

4876

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00104 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 9

quiry as to whether the informa- may say, Mr. Speaker, that this bill tion supplied by the Secretary of was identical in the House and the Senate versions, but in the House com- State was open to inspection by mittee an amendment was made in the all Members of Congress. The body of the bill to include other officers Speaker (2) responded: than originally were named in the House bill, namely, the members of . . . [T]he Chair states that disposi- alien-enemy hearing boards. The tion of the report, what should be done House committee conceived it to be with it, whether it should be thrown wise to amend the title to show that open to all Members of Congress, is a the amendment had been put in the matter within the discretion of the For- bill, but the Senate, in passing the bill, eign Affairs Committee. although it adopted the House amend- Parliamentarian’s Note: Under ment, did not amend the title. Rule XI clause 2(e)(2), House MR. [EARL C.] MICHENER [of Michi- Rules and Manual § 706c (1981), gan]: Mr. Speaker, a point of order. (4) all Members are given access to THE SPEAKER: The gentleman will state it. committee files, with specified ex- MR. MICHENER: The gentleman from ceptions relating to the Com- Alabama has not submitted a par- mittee on Standards of Official liamentary inquiry. He has asked the Conduct. Chair for a legal opinion on what the gentleman himself admits is debatable. Under the rules of the House, the Speaker of the House is not required to § 9. Titles and Preambles render legal opinions, at least without notice. Purpose of Title MR. HOBBS: I am not contending that the Speaker is required to do so. § 9.1 Titles in legislation are I am asking as a matter of the grace for purposes of identifica- and indulgence of the Chair that he do tion, and do not affect the so, and advise us if the Senate version obvious meaning of a statute. be adopted, the limited reference in the title would be sufficient to carry the On Dec. 20, 1941,(3) during con- full bill as amended. sideration of S. 2082, the fol- THE SPEAKER: The Chair thinks that lowing exchange took place: the title of the bill is identification more than anything else. Mr. Justice MR. [SAM] HOBBS [of Alabama]: Mr. Brewer in the case of Patterson v. Speaker, I should like to invoke the Bank Eudora (190 U.S. 169) held— ruling of the Chair on that point. I That the title is no part of the statute and cannot be used to set at 2. William B. Bankhead (Ala.). naught its obvious meaning. 3. 87 CONG. REC. 10079, 77th Cong. 1st Sess. 4. Sam Rayburn (Tex.).

4877

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00105 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 9 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

Titles as Related to Germane- THE CHAIRMAN: (6) The Chair is ness ready to rule. The title of the bill does not control. It is the body of the bill that controls. When an individual § 9.2 The germaneness of an proposition is added to another indi- amendment to a bill is not vidual proposition by amendment, even determined by the title of the though they are in the same class, they bill; it is the body of the bill are not germane. The Chair sustains the point of order. that is controlling. On Aug. 2, 1949,(5) during con- Amendment of Title sideration in the Committee of the Whole of a bill (H.R. 29) to pro- § 9.3 Amendments to the title vide price supports for tung nuts, of a bill or joint resolution a committee amendment was re- may be considered after its ported applying the provisions of passage. the act to honey. Mr. Wayne L. On Jan. 30, 1962,(7) several Hays, of Ohio, raised a point of committee amendments, including order: one to the title of a bill (H.R. 4879), were offered en bloc. The Mr. Chairman, since the committee amendment has no greater standing Chairman of the Committee of the than any other amendment, the title of Whole reminded the proponent of this bill is to amend the Agricultural the amendments that title amend- Adjustment Act of 1938, as amended, ments are properly considered in to provide parity for tung nuts and for the House following passage. other purposes. I make the point of order that the inclusion of honey is not § 9.4 Amendment to titles of related to the bill and is, therefore, not bills are properly presented in order. after the bill is passed and MR. [WALTER K.] GRANGER [of Utah]: Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman are not debatable. yield? On Dec. 11, 1947,(8) during con- MR. HAYS of Ohio: I yield to the gen- sideration in the House of a for- tleman from Utah. eign aid bill (H.R. 4604) the fol- MR. GRANGER: I trust the gentleman lowing exchange took place: will not press his point of order. We are willing to concede the point would MR. [CHARLES J.] KERSTEN of Wis- apply, but what we will have to do is consin: Mr. Speaker, I have an amend- take out the part of the bill that the gentleman I am sure is interested 6. John McSweeney (Ohio). in. . . . 7. 108 CONG. REC. 1183, 87th Cong. 2d Sess. 5. 95 CONG. REC. 10639, 10640, 81st 8. 93 CONG. REC. 11307, 80th Cong. 1st Cong. 1st Sess. Sess.

4878

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00106 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 9

ment to change the title of the bill, THE SPEAKER: (11) The gentleman will which I understand is proper. state it. ( ) THE SPEAKER: 9 That will come MR. BLANTON: On yesterday, after after the passage of the bill. the first section of the Vinson bill was MR. KERSTEN of Wisconsin: I should read, as shown on page 4216, the gen- like to inform the membership that tleman from Texas [Mr. Patman] this is an important amendment and I moved to strike out the first section should like to speak on it. and to insert his own bill as a sub- THE SPEAKER: It is not debatable. stitute therefor, giving the usual notice Parliamentarian’s Note: Rule that, in case his amendment carried, XIX, ‘‘Of Amendments’’, specifies he would move to strike out the remaining sections of the Vinson bill. that ‘‘Amendments to the title of a MR. [FRED M.] VINSON of Kentucky: bill or resolution shall not be in Mr. Speaker, a point of order. order until after its passage, and MR. BLANTON: I am making the shall be decided without debate.’’ point of order now. House Rules and Manual § 822 MR. VINSON of Kentucky: Mr. Speak- (1981). er, I am making a point of order to the gentleman’s point of order. My point of Preambles Generally order is that the bill to which the gentleman’s motion applies has been con- § 9.5 Where no action is taken cluded and is history. to strike out the preamble of MR. BLANTON: In connection with my the bill and the bill is passed, point of order, I am asking the Chair a parliamentary inquiry. the preamble remains as a THE SPEAKER: The Chair will hear part of the bill. the point of order of the gentleman On Mar. 22, 1935,(10) during from Texas. consideration of a bill (H.R. 3896) MR. BLANTON: Mr. Speaker, the providing for payment of world Chair will find on this page 4216 of the war adjusted service certificates, Record for yesterday that the gen- Mr. Thomas L. Blanton, of Texas, tleman from Texas [Mr. Patman] moved to strike out the first section of raised a point of order: the Vinson bill and offered his bill as Mr. Speaker, I wish to make a point an amendment in the way of a sub- of order with respect to the present stitute, giving proper notice that if his parliamentary situation of one part of amendment were adopted he would the bill, and in connection therewith I thereafter move to strike out all the re- ask permission of the Chair to make a maining paragraphs of the Vinson bill. parliamentary inquiry. Nothing was said about striking out the preamble of the bill which pre- 9. Joseph W. Martin, Jr. (Mass.). ceded the first section, and it was not 10. 79 CONG. REC. 4314, 4315, 74th Cong. 1st Sess. 11. Joseph W. Byrns (Tenn.).

4879

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00107 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 9 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

stricken out, although the gentleman THE SPEAKER: The Chair will state from Texas [Mr. Patman] objected to to the gentleman from Texas that the the reading of the preamble. only way it can be done is by action of The procedure I have outlined was the House. No action was taken by the followed. After the substitute of the House with respect to striking out the gentleman from Texas [Mr. Patman] preamble, so it still remains. was voted upon and adopted by teller vote in the Committee of the Whole Preambles in Committee of the House on the state of the Union, as Whole shown on page 4231 of the Record, the gentleman from Texas [Mr. Patman], § 9.6 In the Committee of the asked unanimous consent that the remaining sections of the Vinson bill that Whole the body of a concur- [followed] section 1 be stricken out, rent resolution is first con- and that request was granted, and the sidered and after the resolv- remaining sections of the Vinson bill ing clauses have been read were stricken out, but the preamble, for amendment, the pre- which preceded the enacting clause, amble is considered and per- was left undisturbed, and remained in the bill just preceding the enacting fected. clause. No action whatever was taken On Oct. 5, 1962,(12) the Com- by the House, or by the Committee of mittee of the Whole, pursuant to a the Whole House on the state of the Union with respect to the preamble ex- special rule (H. Res. 827), under- cept, as before stated, the gentleman took consideration of a concurrent from Texas objected to its being read, resolution (H. Con. Res. 570) ex- as a preamble is never read. And, of pressing the sense of the Congress course, unanimous consent is usually with respect to certain problems requested for the preamble to be that had arisen in Berlin, Ger- stricken out, but as to this bill no such request was made. many. The Committee first consid- The parliamentary inquiry I desire ered amendments to the body of to make is this: although it is not the resolution before considering usual to leave preambles in a bill that amendments to the preamble is finally passed, yet the preamble to thereof. this bill is so apropos and was so well written in the bill introduced by our § 9.7 Amendments to the pre- friend, the gentleman from Kentucky amble of a concurrent resolu- [Mr. Vinson], and it so well applies to the Patman bill that it should stay in, tion are considered and and not be stricken out, and I wish to voted on in the Committee of ask the Chair whether or not the pre- the Whole after amendments amble could be stricken out except by unanimous consent, or by a motion 12. 108 CONG. REC. 22637, 22638, 87th passed by the House. Cong. 2d Sess.

4880

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00108 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 9

to the body of the resolution, national integrity, support our national and such amendments are policies, guard the continental United States and our overseas possessions, voted on in the House after give protection to our commerce and the resolution has been citizens abroad, and to cooperate with adopted. other world powers in the maintenance of peace; and.’’. . . (13) On Oct. 30, 1945, a concur- THE CHAIRMAN: The question is on rent resolution (H. Con. Res. 80) the committee amendment to the pre- expressing the sense of the Con- amble. gress regarding the size of the The amendment was agreed to. post-war Navy was considered in After consideration of the reso- the Committee of the Whole. After lution the Committee rose and re- the reading of the resolution the ported it back to the House: Clerk read the amendments to the THE SPEAKER: (15) Under the rule, the resolution proposed by the com- previous question is ordered. mittee that reported it. Mr. W. Is a separate vote demanded on any amendment? If not, the Chair will put Sterling Cole, of New York, raised them en gross. a parliamentary inquiry: The amendments were agreed to. Mr. Chairman, I wonder if we are THE SPEAKER: The question is on the going to consider the amendments to adoption of the resolution. the preamble first? MR. [CARL] VINSON [of Georgia]: Mr. Speaker, on that I ask for the yeas and THE CHAIRMAN: (14) The amendments nays. to the preamble are considered after The yeas and nays were ordered. amendments to the body of the resolu- The question was taken; and there tion. were—yeas 347, nays 0, answered The following committee amend- ‘‘present’’ 1, not voting 83, as fol- ment to the preamble was consid- lows: . . . ered: The result of the vote was announced as above recorded. In the preamble, page 1, fourth para- A motion to reconsider was laid on graph, strike out ‘‘giving due consider- the table. ation to the security of the United THE SPEAKER: The question is on the States and its Territories and insular amendment to the preamble. possessions, the protection of our com- The amendment to the preamble was merce, and the necessity for cooper- agreed to. ating with other world powers in the maintenance of peace; and’’ and insert Preambles in the House in lieu thereof ‘‘in order to insure our § 9.8 In response to a par- 13. 91 CONG. REC. 10202, 10203, 10205, liamentary inquiry, the 10206, 79th Cong. 1st Sess. 14. Butler B. Hare (S.C.). 15. Sam Rayburn (Tex.).

4881

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00109 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 9 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

Speaker stated that an 278) relating to the right of a Rep- amendment to the preamble resentative-elect Adam C. Powell, of a resolution is considered of New York, to be sworn, Mr. in the House after the adop- Thomas B. Curtis, of Missouri, tion of the resolution. moved the previous question on ( ) the adoption of the preamble of On June 8, 1970, 16 a resolution the resolution. Mr. Phillip Burton, (H. Res. 976) authorizing a select of California, raised a point of committee to study recent devel- order: opments in Southeast Asia was The gentleman from Missouri is urg- being considered in the House. ing a motion that duplicates an action Mr. Hugh L. Carey, of New York, already taken by the House. The raised a parliamentary inquiry House already has had a motion to after certain committee amend- close debate on the preamble and on ments had been agreed to: the resolution as amended. We have already had that vote. I Mr. Speaker, at what point did the make the point of order that the gen- Speaker put the committee amend- tlemen’s request and/or motion is out ment which appears on page 1 to of order. I think the record of the pro- strike out the preamble? ceedings of the House will indicate THE SPEAKER: (17) That question will that the point being advocated reflects come after the adoption of the resolu- accurately the proceedings as they tion. have transpired. THE SPEAKER: (1) The Chair will state § 9.9 The preamble of the sim- that the previous question was ordered on the amendment and the resolution ple resolution is amendable but not on the preamble. in the House following the adoption of the resolution § 9.10 A motion to strike all unless the previous question after the resolving clause of is ordered thereon. The pre- a concurrent resolution does vious question is ordered not affect the preamble separately on the preamble thereof; and a motion to of a resolution after adoption strike out the preamble is of the resolution. properly offered after the On Mar. 1, 1967,(18) after the resolution has been agreed adoption of a resolution (H. Res. to. On Feb. 21, 1966,(2) the House 16. 116 CONG. REC. 18656, 18658, 91st considered a concurrent resolution Cong. 2d Sess. 17. John W. McCormack (Mass.). 1. John W. McCormack (Mass.). 18. 113 CONG. REC. 5038, 90th Cong. 1st 2. 112 CONG. REC. 3473, 89th Cong. 2d Sess. Sess.

4882

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00110 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 10

(H. Con. Res. 552) recognizing the The Clerk read as follows: 50th anniversary of the chartering Mr. Moore moves to strike out the of the Boy Scouts of America. Mr. preamble. Arch A. Moore, Jr., of West Vir- The amendment was agreed to. ginia, asked and received unani- A similar House concurrent resolu- mous consent to consider a similar tion was laid on the table. Senate resolution (S. Con. Res. 68) in lieu of the House concurrent Preamble of Joint Resolution resolution. Mr. Moore then offered an amendment to the Senate reso- § 9.11 The preamble of a joint lution striking out all after the re- resolution is properly solving clause and inserting the amended after the engross- provisions of House Concurrent ment and pending the third Resolution 552: reading of the resolution. THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE: (3) Is On Apr. 2, 1962,(4) the House the purpose of the gentleman from West Virginia to strike out the pre- considered and agreed to a House amble? joint resolution (H.J. Res. 628) MR. MOORE: My amendment would along with a committee amend- strike out the language of the Senate ment to strike out the preamble. concurrent resolution and substitute in lieu thereof the language of the concur- The House Journal records that rent resolution just passed by the the joint resolution was ordered House. engrossed, that the preamble was THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE: Would amended or stricken out, and that the amendment of the gentleman from the resolution was then ordered West Virginia strike out the preamble or all after the enacting clause and read the third time, was read the substitute the language of the House third time, and passed.(5) concurrent resolution just passed? MR. MOORE: It would strike out all after the enacting clause. § 10. Petitions and Memo- THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE: That would not eliminate the preamble. rials MR. MOORE: Then, Mr. Speaker, I move to strike the preamble. A petition is a plea to the Con- The Senate concurrent resolution gress to take some action, or re- was agreed to and a motion to reconsider was laid on the table. frain from action, on a subject of THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE: The legislative concern. The term ‘‘me- Clerk will report the amendment of the gentleman from West Virginia. 4. 108 CONG. REC. 5516, 87th Cong. 2d Sess. 3. Carl Albert (Okla.). 5. H. Jour. 231 (1962).

4883

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00111 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 10 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

morial’’ is ordinarily used to de- 118. By Mr. [Perkins] Bass of New scribe a petition from a state leg- Hampshire (by request): Petition of 67 islature.(6) faculty members of Dartmouth College Petitions and memorials, when seeking the elimination of the House Committee on Un-American Activities brought to the attention of the as a standing committee; to the Com- House by a Member or the Speak- mittee on Rules. er, are referred to the committees having appropriate jurisdiction. Presentation by Petitioners They are not legislative measures, but may provide the initiative for § 10.2 The Speaker declined to legislative action. Thus, they are entertain a unanimous-con- not reported from committee and voted on in the House in the man- sent request that certain pe- ner of bills and resolutions.(7) titioners be permitted to present a petition on the f floor of the House. Introduction by Request On May 24, 1972,(9) the following proceedings took place: § 10.1 When a citizens’ petition is introduced ‘‘by request’’ MRS. [BELLA] ABZUG [of New York]: Mr. Speaker, we have petitioning us under Rule XXII, these words today outstanding citizens of this coun- are entered on the Journal try, social leaders, leaders of the arts, and printed in the Record sciences, and professions. They have following the name of the come here to petition us to act imme- Member who introduces the diately to cut off funds for the war and end our military activity in Indo- petition. china. . . . On Apr. 13, 1961,(8) the fol- Mr. Speaker, I renew my request in lowing was recorded in the the form of asking unanimous consent Record: that a representative of those citizens come in and have the opportunity to Under clause 1 of rule XXII, petitions and papers were laid on the present a petition and that we hear Clerks’ desk and referred as follows: what those people, who are the con- science of this country and who rep- 6. See House Rules and Manual §§ 389, resent a majority of the American peo- 849 (1981). ple, have to say. . . . ( ) 7. The introduction and reference of pe- THE SPEAKER: 10 The time of the titions and memorials is governed by gentlewoman from New York has ex- Rule XXII clauses 1, 3, 4, House pired. Rules and Manual §§ 849, 853, 854 (1981). 9. 118 CONG. REC. 18679–81, 92d Cong. 8. 107 CONG. REC. 5900, 87th Cong. 1st 2d Sess. Sess. 10. Carl Albert (Okla.).

4884

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00112 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 11

The gentlewoman’s request is not in does not have the authority to en- order. tertain a request to waive the rule Parliamentarian’s Note: Under pertaining to the privilege of ad- Rule XXXII clause 1, the Speaker mission to the floor.

B. GENERAL PROCEDURES ASSOCIATED WITH PASSAGE OF LEGISLATION § 11. Readings bill is read in full for the first time the text of the bill as origi- The reading of a bill or joint nally introduced is read. Proposed resolution is an essential step committee amendments are not (14) leading to passage. It is read the reported at that time. first time by title (which require- The three readings referred to ment is now complied with upon in Rule XXI clause 1 do not include the actual procedure for introduction of the bill or joint reading for amendment. Reading resolution by printing the title in for amendment is actually yet an- the Journal and Record), the sec- other reading that, although not ond time in full, and the third specifically provided for in that time by title. The applicable rule, rule, is conducted pursuant to a Rule XXI clause 1, was amended practice of the House derived from in 1965 (11) to eliminate the right an earlier version of the present of any Member to demand the Rule XXIII clause 5,(15) or pursu- reading in full of the engrossed ant to the terms of a special order copy. or rule which may be adopted to The second reading, which is a govern the consideration of a par- reading in full, may be dispensed ticular bill. with only by unanimous con- Cross Reference ( ) sent. 12 It may not be dispensed Reading bills for Amendment and read- with by motion.(13) And when a ing of amendments, Ch. 27, infra.

11. H. Res. 8, 111 CONG. REC. 21–25, a Member in the Committee of the 89th Cong. 1st Sess., Jan. 4, 1965. Whole ‘‘. . . unless its reading is dis- 12. See § 11.1, infra. pensed with by the action of the 13. Compare 4 Hinds’ Precedents § 4738 Committee.’’ where Chairman Albert Hopkins 14. See 75 CONG. REC. 8139, 72d Cong. (Ill.), ruled that a bill that had been 1st Sess., Apr. 13, 1932. read in full in the House may be 15. House Rules and Manual § 872 again read in full on the demand of (1981).

4885

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00113 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 11 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

Reading in Full THE CHAIRMAN: That motion is not privileged.(18) § 11.1 A motion to dispense with the full reading of a bill Interruption by Point of No in the Committee of the Quorum Whole is not in order. § 11.2 A point of no quorum On June 4, 1951,(16) the House may interrupt the reading of resolved itself into the Committee a resolution. of the Whole for the consideration For example, on Mar. 1, 1967,(1) of the District of Columbia Law Mr. Porter Hardy, Jr., of Virginia, Enforcement Act of 1951 (H.R. interrupted the reading of a 4141). The Chairman (17) stated House resolution (H. Res. 278) re- that without objection the first lating to the seating of Represent- (full) reading of the bill would be ative-elect Adam C. Powell, of dispensed with. Objection was New York, to make the point of heard from Mr. Herman P. order that a quorum was not present. Eberharter, of Pennsylvania, and Noting that evidently a quorum the Chairman ordered the Clerk was not present, the Speaker (2) to read the bill. During the reading of the bill a 18. Parliamentarian’s Note: In this in- parliamentary inquiry was raised: stance the Committee of the Whole directed the reading in full of the bill MR. [W. STERLING] COLE of New on its first reading. The bill was read York (interrupting the reading of the by title only on the next day when bill): Mr. Chairman, a parliamentary the Committee of the Whole recon- inquiry. vened to resume consideration of it. THE CHAIRMAN: The gentleman will Although the procedure followed was state it. somewhat unorthodox, it illustrates the point that any Member may de- MR. COLE of New York: Mr. Chair- mand a full reading of a bill before man, is it possible under the rules of general debate thereon begins, pro- the Committee of the Whole to by mo- vided the bill has not previously tion dispense with the further reading been read in full. of a bill? The House can dispense with the THE CHAIRMAN: The Chair will say first reading in Committee of the that it requires unanimous consent to Whole by motion if the motion is suspend the further reading of the bill. made privileged, as when reported from the Committee on Rules. A spe- MR. COLE of New York: It is not pos- cial order reported by the Committee sible to do that by motion? on Rules can also waive the first reading. 16. 97 CONG. REC. 6099–101, 82d Cong. 1. 113 CONG. REC. 4997, 90th Cong. 1st 1st Sess. Sess. 17. Herbert C. Bonner (N.C.). 2. John W. McCormack (Mass.).

4886

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00114 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 11

recognized a Member to move a THE SPEAKER: That is correct. call of the House. MR. [JAMES] ROOSEVELT [of Cali- fornia]: Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary Reading as Related to Motion inquiry. THE SPEAKER: The gentleman will to Recommit state it. MR. ROOSEVELT: If the amendment § 11.3 A motion to recommit is is defeated, what is then the par- properly made in the House liamentary situation? after the third reading of a THE SPEAKER: Then the question is bill. on the engrossment and third reading of the so-called committee bill. On Aug. 13, 1959,(3) during consideration in the House of the Parliamentarian’s Note: The Labor-Management Reporting and ‘‘so-called committee bill’’ would Disclosure Act of 1959 (H.R. 8342) be the original text as introduced. the previous question was ordered § 11.4 A motion to recommit on an amendment agreed to in the was held not to be in order Committee of the Whole. Mr. before the engrossment and Frank Thompson, Jr., of New Jer- third reading of the bill. sey, raised a parliamentary in- ( ) quiry: On June 11, 1959, 5 after debate on the bill (H.R. 7246) to Is it my understanding that the vote amend the Agricultural Act of about to be taken is on whether or not the substitute will be accepted, and 1949 the Speaker announced: that it is not a vote on final passage? The question is on the engrossment THE SPEAKER: (4) It will be a vote on and third reading of the bill. the amendment adopted in the Com- The bill was ordered to be engrossed mittee of the Whole. and read a third time. . . . MR. [THOMAS P.] O’NEILL [of Massa- MR. [CHARLES A.] HALLECK [of Indi- chusetts]: Mr. Speaker, a parliamen- ana]: Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary in- tary inquiry. quiry. THE SPEAKER: The gentleman will THE SPEAKER: (6) The gentleman will state it. state it. MR. O’NEILL: Will a vote to recommit MR. HALLECK: Mr. Speaker, would it then be in order? be in order to vote on the motion to re- THE SPEAKER: After the third read- commit at this time? ing. THE SPEAKER: It would not be in MR. O’NEILL: And then a vote would order until after the reading of the en- be in order on the final passage? grossed copy. . . .

3. 105 CONG. REC. 15859, 86th Cong. 5. 105 CONG. REC. 10561, 86th Cong. 1st Sess. 1st Sess. 4. Sam Rayburn (Tex.). 6. Sam Rayburn (Tex.).

4887

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00115 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 11 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

MR. [HAROLD D.] COOLEY [of North not be read twice in the same Carolina]: Mr. Speaker, a parliamen- legislative day without unan- tary inquiry. imous consent, but the Sen- THE SPEAKER: The gentleman will state it. ate may adjourn for a brief MR. COOLEY: As I understand the period (thus creating a new situation, the gentleman from Okla- legislative day) and then pro- homa [Mr. Belcher] had submitted a ceed to the second reading of motion to recommit. Why should we the bill. not vote on that this afternoon? (7) THE SPEAKER: It is not time to vote On Mar. 24, 1960, there was on it. We have got to have the en- received in the Senate the civil grossed copy of the bill here before the rights bill of 1960 (H.R. 8601) motion to recommit can be offered. messaged from the House of Rep- Parliamentarian’s Note: This resentatives. When the bill had precedent reflects the earlier prac- been read the first time, Senator tice regarding the engrossed copy Lyndon B. Johnson, of Texas, of a bill, which had to be available asked unanimous consent that the and was subject to a demand for bill be read the second time. Sen- full reading. Under the new rule, ator Richard B. Russell, of Geor- bills on their passage are read the gia, objected. Senator Johnson first time by title and the second then moved that the Senate ad- time in full, when, if the previous journ for three minutes, and the question is ordered, the Speaker motion was agreed to. states the question to be: Shall Thus, the Senate adjourned for the bill be engrossed and read a three minutes from 1:32 p.m. to third time? If the question is de- 1:35 p.m. of the same day, and cided in the affirmative, the bill is upon reconvening the civil rights read the third time by title and bill was read a second time and the question then put upon its referred to committee. passage. Rule XXI clause 1, House Rules and Manual (1981). (The § 11.6 In the Senate, by unani- provision permitting a Member to mous consent, a bill may be demand a third reading in full 7. 106 CONG. REC. 6451, 6452, 6454, was eliminated from the rule in 6455, 86th Cong. 2d Sess. 1965.) Under Senate Rule XIV clause 2, every bill and joint resolution re- Reading in the Senate ceives three readings prior to its passage, which readings must be on § 11.5 In the Senate a bill mes- three different days, unless the Sen- saged from the House may ate unanimously directs otherwise.

4888

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00116 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 12

read the second time on the clerk under supervision of the same day it is received by Clerk of the House or the Sec- message from the House. retary of the Senate. After House On Mar. 14, 1962,(8) the pro- action, House bills and resolutions ceedings below were recorded in are engrossed on a distinctive blue the Senate: paper, as are House amendments to measures received from the MR. [EVERETT MCKINLEY] DIRKSEN Senate. This blue paper indicates [of Illinois]: Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that H.R. 10079, which that it is the official copy of the came over from the House and is now measure as passed by the on the table—— House.(10) Senate bills and Senate MR. [JOHN C.] STENNIS [of Mis- amendments to House bills are sissippi]: A point of order, Mr. Presi- engrossed on white paper. The en- dent. Is the Senate in the morning grossed copies of the bill, when hour? signed by the Clerk of the House MR. DIRKSEN: Yes, it is. I ask that the bill be advanced to a (in the case of a bill originating in second reading and be permitted to lie the House) or by the Secretary of on the desk. the Senate (on a Senate bill), be- THE VICE PRESIDENT: (9) Is there ob- come the nucleus of the official jection to the request of the Senator papers which go from one house to from Illinois? the other during the various ac- There being no objection, the bill tions on a bill. A Senate bill can- was ordered to a second reading, and was read the second time. not be acted on in the House, e.g., THE VICE PRESIDENT: Without objec- until the House is in possession of tion the bill will be printed, and will the signed copy of the engrossed lie on the table. Senate bill.

§ 12. Engrossment Star Prints Engrossment is the process by § 12.1 The engrossed copy of a which a bill or resolution or a bill may be ‘‘star printed’’ House amendment to a Senate (that is, reprinted with a star measure is printed on special to indicate the reprinting) to paper by direction of the enrolling rectify clerical errors; and an

8. 108 CONG. REC. 4097, 87th Cong. 2d 10. Procedure in the U.S. House of Rep- Sess. resentatives (97th Cong.), Ch. 24 9. Lyndon B. Johnson (Tex.). § 5.1.

4889

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00117 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 12 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

engrossed ‘‘star print’’ of a House or Senate bill, is simply a bill House bill, substituted for that has been reprinted for the purpose of correcting an error or errors, the original engrossed copy usually of a clerical or typographical containing a clerical error nature, made by some person whose when messaged to the Sen- duty it was to see that such bill, when ate, is properly before that printed, was in conformity in all re- body. spects with and truly and accurately reflected the action of the particular ( ) On July 9, 1957, 11 Senator House in its passage. It is designed to William F. Knowland, of Cali- substitute for a bill in which an error fornia, moved that the Senate pro- has been discovered a reprinted bill ceed to the consideration of the correcting such error or errors and House bill 6127: showing the exact form in which such bill was actually passed by the original Mr. President, on yesterday the Sen- House. The practice of star printing ator from Georgia [Mr. Russell] stated bills has been followed by both Houses that the star-print bill which is now of Congress, in a more or less routine proposed to be taken up upon my mo- manner, for a long period of time. The tion is not the same bill which was Parliamentarian has found instances heretofore read twice and ordered to be going back almost 50 years ago. It is placed on the calendar. This colloquy somewhat analogous to the method of appears on pages 10986–10987 of the correcting by a concurrent resolution Record of July 8, 1957. It was stated errors discovered in an enrolled bill that the star print bill had not been after it has passed through the legisla- read twice. tive processes beyond the stage of I desire to submit a parliamentary amendment; indeed, in some cases, inquiry, as to whether, if my motion after an enrolled bill has been signed prevails, the bill then before the Sen- by the two presiding officers and pre- ate will be the engrossed bill, star sented to the President, it is recalled, print, and as to whether the validity of the errors are corrected, and the bill any proceedings the Senate may now again signed and presented to the or hereafter take on the star-print bill President for his action thereon. may be questioned. An engrossed bill is attested, in the THE VICE PRESIDENT: (12) A study of Senate by the Secretary, and in the the precedents indicates that the ques- House by the Clerk, and transmitted to tion as to the validity of a star print the other body by message. If an error has not been previously raised in the in such a bill is not discovered until Senate. . . . after its receipt by the other House, A star print, so called, of an en- the usual procedure is for the enrolling grossed bill, whether it is either a clerk of the first House to have a star print made correcting such error and it 11. 103 CONG. REC. 11089, 85th Cong. is delivered to the enrolling clerk of 1st Sess. the second House, who delivers to the 12. Richard M. Nixon (Calif.). first House the original signed bill con-

4890

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00118 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 12

taining the error. In such a case, a star amendment, and the amendment as print is made by the enrolling clerk of modified was agreed to. By inadvert- the second House of the bill on white ence, the amendment as adopted was paper showing the bill in its correct inserted in the bill at the same point form, with the same action indicated where it was originally offered instead thereon as appears on the original bill. of at the place where it was offered the All the original copies of the bill are second time. withdrawn from the files and the star- When the error was discovered, the print copies substituted therefor, enrolling clerk of the House had a star whether the bill was referred to a com- print made of the engrossed bill, in mittee or placed on the calendar. which the language of the amendment The error in the engrossed bill H.R. was transposed from the erroneous 6127, the Civil Rights Act of 1957, was place in the bill to the place specifi- not discovered until after it had been cally indicated by him when he offered transmitted by message to the Senate, the amendment the second time, which read twice, and placed upon the cal- now appears on page 12, as lines 10 to endar. 23, inclusive, of the Senate Calendar During the consideration of the bill print of the bill. in the House on June 17, 1957, as It was simply a transposition of the shown on pages 9378–9384 of the Con- language of the amendment to the cor- gressional Record, Mr. Whitener, of rect and proper place, as indicated by North Carolina, offered an amendment the proceedings in the Congressional embracing the language of the proviso Record. No word was changed in this shown in the original engrossed bill be- transposition. It was placed in the star ginning on page 8 line 19, and extend- printed bill in exactly the same lan- ing down to and including line 9, page guage as proposed and adopted by the 9. A point of order was made and sus- House. tained by the Chairman, Mr. Forand, that it was not germane specifically to The transposition necessitated a the section to which it was offered, but change in the pages and lines of the it was stated by the Chairman that it star print after the place in which the would be germane to the bill as a sepa- amendment was incorrectly inserted, rate section. Mr. Whitener then ob- and it was therefore necessary to have tained unanimous consent that he a star print made in the Senate of the might offer it as an amendment in the original calendar print, in view of the form of a separate section, to be known fact that any amendment offered after as subsection (e) of section 131, and to page 8, line 19, would not correspond be inserted immediately following line to the language in the star printed en- 13, on page 12. An amendment to the grossed bill. amendment was offered by Mr. Hoff- When this star print was delivered man, of Michigan, which was ruled out to the Secretary’s Office of the Senate, on a point of order as not being ger- following the custom, undeviated from, mane to Mr. Whitener’s amendment. the original erroneous engrossed bill Mr. Whitener, by unanimous consent, was returned to the enrolling clerk of then made a slight modification of his the House, and a copy of the Senate

4891

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00119 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 12 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

Calendar print of the bill was sent to and aircraft and construction of the Government Printing Office for a shore and offshore establishments star print. for the Coast Guard, Mr. Frank T. The proceedings in connection with the star printing of the bill in the Sen- Bow, of Ohio, offered an amend- ate followed the usual routine proce- ment. Mr. Hastings Keith, of Mas- dure customary in the correction of er- sachusetts, then raised a par- rors in engrossed bills. liamentary inquiry: MR. [RICHARD B.] RUSSELL: Mr. Mr. Chairman, if the amendment is President, a parliamentary inquiry. adopted and I hope and trust it will be; THE VICE PRESIDENT: The Senator would that not require the renum- will state it. bering of the lines in which the earlier MR. RUSSELL: The Chair did not so amendments have been incorporated state specifically, but I understood the into the existing legislation? distinguished Senator from California THE CHAIRMAN: (14) The gentleman to propound a parliamentary inquiry may request that the Clerk be author- as to the validity of this procedure. Did ized to renumber accordingly. I correctly understand the Chair to rule that this remarkable procedure MR. KEITH: I would so request. was valid under rule XIV? THE CHAIRMAN: The gentleman may make the request that the Clerk be au- THE VICE PRESIDENT: The Chair did so rule. thorized to renumber the sections accordingly after the Committee rises House, Not Committee of the and we are in the House. Whole, Controls Engrossment After the Committee of the Whole had arisen and reported § 12.2 A request that the Clerk, back to the House and the Speak- in the engrossment of a bill, er (15) had announced the question make corrections in section as being the engrossment and numbers and cross ref- third reading of the bill, Mr. Keith erences in the bill, is prop- raised a parliamentary inquiry: erly made in the House, fol- Mr. Speaker, while we were in Com- lowing passage of the bill mittee of the Whole I raised a ques- and is not in order in the tion, the answer to which indicated Committee of the Whole. that I should ask permission that certain sections be renumbered. On Apr. 29, 1969,(13) during con- THE SPEAKER: The Chair will state sideration in the Committee of the in response to the parliamentary in- Whole on the bill (H.R. 4153) au- quiry that the gentleman’s request will thorizing procurement of vessels be in order and the gentleman will be

13. 115 CONG. REC. 10753, 91st Cong. 14. Jacob H. Gilbert (N.Y.). 1st Sess. 15. John W. McCormack (Mass.).

4892

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00120 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 12

recognized to make such a request Senate Request for Return of ( ) after the bill is passed. 16 Bill From House, Privileged in House The Clerk May be Directed by Resolution to Correct En- § 12.4 The Speaker laid before grossment the House a resolution of the § 12.3 The House agreed to a Senate, in the form shown resolution, in the form below, requesting the House shown below, authorizing to return to that body an en- and directing the Clerk of grossed bill together with ac- the House to make certain companying papers. changes in the engrossment On June 16 (legislative day of a joint resolution. June 14), 1938,(18) the following On May 10, 1945,(17) the House, proceedings took place in the by unanimous consent, considered House: and agreed to the following reso- THE SPEAKER: (19) The Chair desires lution (H. Res. 254): to make an announcement with reference to a request sent to the House Resolved, That the Clerk of the House in the engrossment of the joint this morning by the Senate of the resolution (H.J. Res. 60) proposing an United States. The Clerk will report amendment to the Constitution of the the order of the Senate of the United United States relative to the making of States. treaties, is authorized and directed, in The Clerk read as follows: the last sentence of section 1 of the Ordered, That the Secretary be di- proposed article of amendment to the rected to request the House of Rep- Constitution, to insert after the word resentatives to return to the Senate ‘‘against’’ the following: ‘‘advising and the engrossed bill (H.R. 7084) to pro- consenting to the’’, so that such sen- vide that all cabs for hire in the Dis- tence shall read as follows: ‘‘In all such trict of Columbia be compelled to cases the votes of both Houses shall be carry insurance for the protection of determined by yeas and nays, and the passengers, and for other purposes, together with all accompanying pa- names of the persons voting for and pers. against advising and consenting to the ratification of the treaty shall be en- THE SPEAKER: The Chair thinks it is tered on the Journal of each House re- proper to state that as a matter of spectively.’’ comity between the two branches, when a request of this character comes 16. See also Procedure in the U.S. House over from the other body to this body, of Representatives (97th Cong.), Ch. 24 §§ 5.4, 5.5. 18. 83 CONG. REC. 9681, 75th Cong. 3d 17. 91 CONG. REC. 4434, 79th Cong. 1st Sess. Sess. 19. William B. Bankhead (Ala.).

4893

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00121 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 12 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

it is the duty of the House to comply (H.R. 3587) making supplemental ap- with such order and it is under the propriations for the fiscal year ending precedents a matter of privilege. June 30, 1951, and for other purposes, MR. [THOMAS D.] O’MALLEY [of Wis- and that the Clerk be authorized to re- consin]: Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary engross the said bill with the following inquiry. correction: THE SPEAKER: The gentleman will Page 11, line 11, strike out state it. ‘‘$18,350,000’’ and insert in lieu thereof MR. O’MALLEY: What will be the sta- ‘‘$19,100,000.’’ tus of the measure when it returns to MR. [JOHN] TABER [of New York]: the Senate? Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to ob- THE SPEAKER: The Chair cannot an- ject, this is because the enrolling clerk swer that question. We are simply re- made a mistake in indicating that the turning the bill to the Senate. Heselton amendment was carried in- MR. O’MALLEY: It does not go to con- stead of being defeated on roll call; is ference by reason of this order? that correct? THE SPEAKER: It does not. Without MR. [JAMIE L.] WHITTEN [of Mis- objection, the request of the Senate sissippi]: That is correct. The en- will be complied with. grossed copy showed the earlier action There was no objection. but failed to change back on final roll § 12.5 The House, by unani- call. mous consent, considered a A Concurrent Resolution is resolution requesting the Used to Effect Change in En- Senate to return a House bill grossment When Both Houses and authorizing the Clerk to Have Acted reengross the bill with a correction. § 12.6 The House, by unani- On Apr. 16, 1951,(20) the fol- mous consent, considered a lowing House resolution (H. Res. concurrent resolution au- 195) was before the House by thorizing the Secretary of unanimous consent: the Senate to re-engross the Resolved, That the Senate be re- amendments of the Senate to quested to return to the House the bill a House bill and make a correction in such reengross- 20. 97 CONG. REC. 3918, 82d Cong. 1st ment. Sess. H.R. 3587 had not yet been re- ( ) ported in the Senate. This situation On June 27, 1951, 1 the concur- differs from that in Sec. 12.6, infra, rent resolution shown below was in which the Senate had acted on the before the House. bill and requested a conference which had been agreed to by the 1. 97 CONG. REC. 7254, 82d Cong. 1st House. Sess. As noted above (see § 12.5,

4894

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00122 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 12

INDEPENDENT OFFICES APPROPRIATION offices appropriation bill. It all adds up BILL, 1952 to this: Apparently the other body has made a mistake in printing or engross- MR. [ALBERT] THOMAS [of Texas]: ing this amendment. Amendment No. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent 79 deals with salaries and expenses for for the immediate consideration of the the Veterans’ Administration. What concurrent resolution (S. Con. Res. 35) happened was that they show a reduc- ordering the reengrossment of the Sen- tion in that appropriation of about ate amendment to H.R. 3880, the inde- $1,200,000 more than the figure actu- pendent offices appropriation bill for ally agreed upon by the Senate. 1952. The Clerk read the concurrent reso- Correction in Engrossed Bill lution, as follows: Prior to Disagreement to Sen- Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring), That ate Amendment the Secretary of the Senate be, and he is hereby, authorized and directed § 12.7 A concurrent resolution to reengross the amendments of the authorizing the Clerk of the Senate to the bill (H.R. 3880) making appropriations for the Executive House to make certain cor- Office and sundry independent exec- rections in the engrossed utive bureaus, boards, commissions, copy of a House bill was con- corporations, agencies, and offices for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1952, sidered and agreed to before and for other purposes; and to re- the House disagreed to a engross Senate amendment numbered 79 so as to read as follows: Senate amendment to the On page 35, line 23, strike out bill. ‘‘$875,163,335’’ and insert (3) ‘‘$873,105,770.’’ On July 16, 1968, Mr. Wayne N. Aspinall, of Colorado, asked (2) THE SPEAKER: Is there objection to unanimous consent for the consid- the request of the gentleman from Texas? eration of a concurrent resolution MR. [JOHN] Phillips [of California]: (H. Con. Res. 798) authorizing the Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to ob- Clerk of the House of Representa- ject, will the gentleman from Texas tives to make certain changes in [Mr. Thomas] please explain the rea- the engrossed copy of the bill son for the request on the part of the (H.R. 9098) to revise the bound- other body? aries of the Bad Lands National MR. THOMAS: Mr. Speaker, this resolution authorizes reengrossment of Monument in the State of South amendment No. 79 of the independent Dakota. The resolution read in part as supra), the Senate had requested follows: and the House had agreed to a conference on the bill H.R. 3880. 3. 114 CONG. REC. 21538, 90th Cong. 2. Sam Rayburn (Tex.). 2d Sess.

4895

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00123 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 12 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

In lieu of the language appearing on amendments to Senate Joint Resolu- page 4, lines 9 through 21 of the House tion 47, providing for the appointment engrossed bill and the Senate amend- of a National Agricultural Jefferson Bi- ment thereto, insert the following: centenary Committee to carry out ‘‘(b) Any former Indian or non-Indian under the general direction of the owner of a tract of land, whether title United States Commission for the was held in trust or fee, may purchase Celebration of the Two Hundredth An- such tract from the Secretary of the In- niversary of the Birth of Thomas Jef- terior. . . .’’ ferson appropriate exercises and activi- The concurrent resolution was ties in recognition of the services and contributions of Thomas Jefferson to agreed to. the farmers and the agriculture of the Mr. Aspinall then asked unani- Nation, the Clerk of the House be au- mous consent to take from the thorized to include therein an amend- Speaker’s table the same bill mes- ment striking out the preamble. saged back to the House from the THE SPEAKER: (5) Is there objection to Senate with a Senate amendment. the request of the gentleman from Mr. Aspinall asked unanimous Georgia? consent to consider such bill and There was no objection. disagree to the Senate amend- § 12.9 Where the House amendment. ed the text of a Senate bill There was no objection. but neglected to make a con- Effecting Changes by Unani- forming change in the title mous Consent thereof, the Clerk was authorized and directed, by § 12.8 By unanimous consent, unanimous consent, to cor- the Clerk was authorized to rect the oversight by insert- include an amendment striking the correct title in the ing out a preamble in the en- engrossment of the House grossment of amendments to amendments to the Senate a Senate joint resolution bill. passed in the House. On May 15, 1968,(6) Mr. William On Nov. 16, 1943,(4) Mr. Robert R. Poage, of Texas, made the fol- Ramspeck, of Georgia, made the lowing unanimous-consent re- following unanimous-consent request: quest: Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous con- Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that in the engrossment of the sent that in the engrossment of the 5. Sam Rayburn (Tex.). 4. 89 CONG. REC. 9587, 78th Cong. 1st 6. 114 CONG. REC. 13400, 90th Cong. Sess. 2d Sess.

4896

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00124 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 12

amendment to the Senate bill (S. 2986) made the following unanimous- to extend Public Law 480, 83d Con- consent request: gress, to which the House agreed yesterday, that the Clerk of the House be Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous con- authorized and directed to make a consent that the Clerk be authorized to forming amendment to the title of the make the appropriate conforming bill. The title of the Senate bill pro- changes in, and omissions of, section vided for a 3-year extension of the law, numbers and references in the bill but the House only extended the law (H.R. 7977). until December 31, 1969. THE SPEAKER: (9) Is there objection to The title should be amended to read the request of the gentleman from New as follows: York? There was no objection. To extend the Agricultural Trade and Assistance Act of 1954, as Similarly, on July 24, 1968,(10) amended, and for other purposes. after the House passed H.R. THE SPEAKER: (7) Is there objection to 17735, Mr. Emanuel Celler, of the request of the gentleman from New York, made the following Texas? unanimous-consent request: MR. [H. R.] GROSS [of Iowa]: Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object, Mr. Speaker, because of the number that means then specifically that it is of amendments adopted to the bill just limited to 1 year? passed, I ask unanimous consent that the Clerk, in the engrossment of the MR. POAGE: That is right; it just gets bill, be authorized and directed to it in the title. make such changes in section num- MR. GROSS: Mr. Speaker, I withdraw bers, cross-references, and other tech- my reservation of objection. nical and conforming corrections as THE SPEAKER: Is there objection to may be required to reflect the actions the request of the gentleman from of the House. . . . Texas? There was no objection. There was no objection. § 12.11 The Clerk was author- § 12.10 The Clerk may be au- ized, by unanimous consent, thorized by unanimous con- to make clerical corrections sent to make certain changes in the engrossment of a in section numbers, cross ref- House amendment to a Sen- erences, and other technical ate bill. changes during the engross- On Sept. 12, 1967,(11) Mr. ment of a House-passed bill. Wright Patman, of Texas, made On Oct. 11, 1967,(8) Mr. Thad- deus J. Dulski, of New York, 9. John W. McCormack (Mass.). 10. 114 CONG. REC. 23096, 90th Cong. 7. John W. McCormack (Mass.). 2d Sess. 8. 113 CONG. REC. 28672, 90th Cong. 11. 113 CONG. REC. 25230, 90th Cong. 1st Sess. 1st Sess.

4897

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00125 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 12 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

the following unanimous-consent formity in the bill in respect of typog- request: raphy and indentation; and (3) To amend or strike out cross-ref- Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous con- erences that have become erroneous or sent that the Clerk may make any nec- superfluous, and to insert cross-ref- essary corrections in punctuation, sec- erences made necessary by reason of tion numbers, and cross references in changes made by the House. the amendment of the House to the bill, S. 1862. § 12.13 The Clerk of the House ( ) THE SPEAKER: 12 Is there objection was directed, in the engross- to the request of the gentleman from Texas? ment of House Resolution 7 There was no objection. (re the adoption of rules for the 90th Congress), to make § 12.12 A unanimous-consent certain corrections in the request was made author- text of the resolution and the izing the Clerk in the en- amendment thereto to reflect grossing of a revenue bill to the intention of the House. make changes in the table of On Jan. 12, 1967,(14) Mr. Carl contents, to make clerical Albert, of Oklahoma, asked unani- changes, and to amend or mous consent that in the engross- strike out cross references. ment of House Resolution 7 the On Apr. 28, 1936,(13) Mr. Robert Clerk of the House be authorized L. Doughton, of North Carolina, and directed to make certain cor- submitted the following unani- rections: mous-consent request: MR. GERALD R. FORD [of Michigan]: I ask unanimous consent that in the Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to ob- engrossing of the pending bill (H.R. ject, as I understand it, the request of 12395), the Clerk of the House be au- the distinguished majority leader is thorized: solely for the purpose of perfecting (1) To make such changes in the what the House intended to do on table of contents as may be necessary Tuesday last; is that correct? to make such table conform to the ac- MR. ALBERT: Mr. Speaker, will the tion of the House in respect of the bill; distinguished minority leader yield? (2) To make such clerical changes as MR. GERALD R. FORD: I yield to the may be necessary to the proper num- gentleman from Oklahoma. bering and lettering of the various por- MR. ALBERT: Mr. Speaker, the gen- tions of the bill, and to secure uni- tleman from Michigan is correct. Most of them are obvious. Obviously, we 12. John W. McCormack (Mass.). 13. 80 CONG. REC. 6299, 74th Cong. 2d 14. 113 CONG. REC. 430, 431, 90th Cong. Sess. 1st Sess.

4898

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00126 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 13

were working last year under the rules THE PRESIDING OFFICER: (17) That bill of the 89th Congress, but there were has come over from the House and has two or three clerical errors and the been signed by the President pro tem- only purpose is to correct clerical er- pore. rors. MR. HICKENLOOPER: May I ask at MR. GERALD R. FORD: Mr. Speaker, I what time it came over from the withdraw my reservation of objection. House? (15) THE SPEAKER: Is there objection THE PRESIDING OFFICER: About 7 or to the request of the gentleman from 8 minutes after 12 o’clock.(18) Oklahoma? MR. HICKENLOOPER: Was it pre- There was no objection. sented through the so-called front door of the Senate and was any public announcement made of the message from § 13. Transmission of Legisla- the House at the time is was sent tive Messages Between over? THE PRESIDING OFFICER: It was not House and Senate officially announced when it was received. Messages From House MR. HICKENLOOPER: So there was no public announcement, at the time the § 13.1 Customarily, sundry en- bill was coming from the House, of this rolled bills, signed by the having been signed by the Speaker. Is Speaker, are announced as a that correct? group (but seldom by indi- THE PRESIDING OFFICER: That is cor- vidual title or with reference rect. to number or content) at the MR. HICKENLOOPER: Therefore, there Senate door when they are was no opportunity or knowledge on the part of anyone who might have messaged from the House, al- wanted to raise parliamentary issues though this procedure has with regard to that bill because there provoked discussion. was no opportunity as the result of any On May 20, 1963,(16) Senator notice. THE PRESIDING OFFICER: Apparently Bourke B. Hickenlooper, of Iowa, there was none. raised a parliamentary inquiry: MR. HICKENLOOPER: May I ask if Mr. President, I wanted to make a that is the usual procedure, or the un- parliamentary inquiry. For the record, usual procedure, for a bill to be mes- may I ask if H.R. 4997, which is the saged over surreptitiously and secretly feed grain bill, has been messaged over from the House of Representatives, in from the House to the Senate? that manner?

15. John W. McCormack (Mass.). 17 Edward M. Kennedy (Mass.). 16. 109 CONG. REC. 9006, 88th Cong. 1st 18. Recorded in the Record at 109 CONG. Sess. REC. 8978, 88th Cong. 1st Sess.

4899

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00127 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 13 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

THE PRESIDING OFFICER: The usual following communication from the procedure is for a bill to be announced Clerk of the House of Representa- at the door. tives: (22) MR. HICKENLOOPER: It was not fol- OFFICE OF THE CLERK, lowed in this case. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, THE PRESIDING OFFICER: That is cor- Washington, D.C., April 10, 1965. rect. The Honorable the SPEAKER, MR. HICKENLOOPER: I thank the House of Representatives. Chair for explaining this very inter- esting and unusual procedure in con- SIR: Pursuant to authority granted nection with this bill.(19) on April 8, 1965, the Clerk received from the Secretary of the Senate today Messages From Senate the following message: That the Senate passed H.R. 2362, entitled ‘‘An act to strengthen and im- § 13.2 The Speaker lays before prove educational quality and edu- the House letters from the cational opportunities in the Nation’s Clerk advising him that pur- elementary and secondary schools.’’ suant to authority granted, Respectfully yours, RALPH R. ROBERTS, the Clerk had, during ad- Clerk, U.S. House of Representatives. journment, received messages from the Senate rel- Revenue and Appropriation ative to the passage of House Measures bills. § 13.3 The House has agreed to ( ) On Apr. 12, 1965, 20 the Speak- privileged resolutions pro- ( ) er 21 laid before the House the viding for the return to the 19. Parliamentarian’s Note: H.R. 4997, Senate of joint resolutions the Feed Grain Act of 1963, was passed by that body and held signed by the Speaker shortly after to infringe on the revenue- noon on May 20. Since there was raising powers of the House some urgency about getting the bill under the Constitution. to the White House as quickly as (1) possible, the messenger from the On Mar. 12, 1953, the House House took the bill directly to the considered and agreed to the fol- Senate where he was instructed, by the Secretary of the Senate, to take 22. See also 111 CONG. REC. 14845, 89th the bill directly to the desk for signa- Cong. 1st Sess. June 28, 1965; and 111 CONG. REC. 9115, 89th Cong. 1st ture by the President pro tempore. Sess. May 3, 1965. The bill was then taken immediately For a more extensive discussion of to the White House by a representa- House-Senate messages and House- tive of the Secretary of the Senate. Senate relations generally, see Ch. 20. 111 CONG. REC. 7771, 89th Cong. 1st 32, infra. Sess. 1. 99 CONG. REC. 1897, 1898, 83d Cong. 21. John W. McCormack (Mass.). 1st Sess.

4900

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00128 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 14

lowing privileged resolution (H. Farm Credit Administration for the fis- Res. 176): cal year 1963, in the opinion of the House, contravenes the first clause of Resolved, That Senate Joint Resolu- the seventh section of the first article tion 52, making an appropriation out of the Constitution and is an infringe- of the general fund of the District of ment of the privileges of this House, Columbia, in the opinion of the House, and that the said joint resolution be contravenes the first clause of the sev- taken from the Speaker’s table and be enth section of the first article of the respectfully returned to the Senate Constitution and is an infringement of with a message communicating this the privileges of this House, and that resolution. the said joint resolution be taken from the Speaker’s table and be respectfully The jurisdiction and authority returned to the Senate with a message of the House over revenue bills is communicating this resolution. treated more extensively in the Again, on July 2, 1960,(2) the chapter on the general powers and House considered and agreed to prerogatives of the House. See the following resolution (H. Res. chapter 13, supra. 598): That Senate Joint Resolution 217 § 14. Enrollment; Cor- [extending Sugar Act of 1948] in the opinion of this House contravenes the recting Bills in Enroll- first clause of the seventh section of ment the first article of the Constitution of the United States, and is an infringe- Enrollment Procedure ment of the privileges of this House, and that the said resolution be respect- § 14.1 A bill is enrolled by the fully returned to the Senate with a House in which it originated. message communicating this resolution. Under the enrollment procedure, the bill is printed at (3) Similarly, on Oct. 10, 1962, the Government Printing Of- the House considered and agreed fice on distinctive paper to the following resolution (H. under special supervision.(4) Res. 831): Resolved, That Senate Joint Resolu- § 14.2 Under Rule X clause tion 234, making appropriations for the 4(d)(1),(5) the Committee on Department of Agriculture and the 4. Procedure in the U.S. House of Rep- 2. 106 CONG. REC. 15818, 15819, 86th resentatives (97th Cong.), Ch. 24 Cong. 2d Sess. § 6.1. 3. 108 CONG. REC. 23014, 23015, 87th 5. House Rules and Manual § 697b Cong. 2d Sess. (1981).

4901

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00129 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 14 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

House Administration has amendment to the Constitution of the function of ‘‘examining the United States relating to the all bills, amendments, and terms of office of the President. joint resolutions after pas- Mr. Le Compte announced further sage by the House and, in co- that that committee had pre- operation with the Senate, sented to and filed with the Sec- examining all bills and joint retary of State such joint resolu- resolutions which shall have tion. passed both Houses to see Parliamentarian’s Note: Con- that they are correctly en- stitutional amendments, having rolled, forthwith presenting passed both Houses of Congress, those which originated in the are now presented to the Adminis- House to the President of the trator of General Services for United States in person after transmission to the several states their signature by the Speak- for ratification. See 1 USC Sec. er of the House and the 106b; 1 USC Sec. 112. President of the Senate and reporting the fact and date § 14.4 In the Senate, the re- of such presentation to the sponsibility for the correct House.’’ enrollment of bills and joint resolutions is vested in the § 14.3 The Committee on Secretary of the Senate. House Administration re- On Jan. 30, 1945,(7) the Senate ports to the House when it considered and agreed to the fol- carries out its functions of lowing resolution (S. Res. 64): certifying the correct enroll- Resolved, That the Secretary of the ment of bills and joint resolu- Senate shall examine all bills, amend- tions. ments, and joint resolutions before On Mar. 24, 1947,(6) Mr. Karl they go out of the possession of the M. Le Compte, of Iowa, from the Senate, and shall examine all bills and Committee on House Administra- joint resolutions which shall have passed both Houses, to see that the tion reported that that committee same are correctly enrolled, and, when had examined and found truly en- signed by the Speaker of the House rolled and signed by the Speaker and the President of the Senate, shall the joint resolution of the House forthwith present the same, when they (H.J. Res. 27) proposing an shall have originated in the Senate, to

6. 93 CONG. REC. 2482, 80th Cong. 1st 7. 91 CONG. REC. 591, 592, 79th Cong. Sess. 1st Sess.

4902

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00130 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 14

the President of the United States, and Changing Items in Appropria- report the fact and date of such pres- tion Bill entation to the Senate. Parliamentarian’s Note: The § 14.6 Items in an appropria- provisions of this resolution are tion bill not in disagreement now part of the standing rules of between the two Houses, and the Senate. See Rule XIV, para- hence not committed to the graph 5, Senate Manual § 14.5 conferees, were, by unani- (1975). mous consent, changed Authorizing Numerical Correc- through adoption of a con- tions current resolution directing the changes in the enroll- § 14.5 The House agreed to a ment of the bill. concurrent resolution pro- On July 23, 1962,(9) Mr. Albert viding that in the enrollment Thomas, of Texas, called up for of general appropriation bills consideration under a previous enacted during the remain- unanimous-consent agreement a der of a session, the Clerk of concurrent resolution (H. Con. the House could correct Res. 505) making 29 changes in a chapter, title, and section supplemental appropriation bill numbers. (H.R. 11038). Had the items been On July 4, 1952,(8) the House, included in the conference agree- by unanimous consent, considered ment, the report would have been and agreed to the following con- subject to a point of order. In ex- current resolution (H. Con. Res. planation of the concurrent resolu- 239): tion Mr. Thomas stated: Resolved by the House of Representa- Mr. Speaker, it will be recalled this tives (the Senate concurring), That in deals with what we call the second the enrollment of general appropria- supplemental appropriation bill for tion bills enacted during the remainder 1962. When the supplemental left the of the second session of the Eighty-sec- House it had 55 items carrying about ond Congress the Clerk of the House $447 million, which was a reduction, in may correct chapter, title, and section numbers. round figures, of $100 million under the budget, a reduction of about 20 The Senate also agreed to this percent. resolution (see H. Jour. 761, 82d It went to the other body and that Cong. 2d Sess., July 5, 1952). body added some 29 items, increasing

8. 98 CONG. REC. 9440, 82d Cong. 2d 9. 108 CONG. REC. 14400, 87th Cong. Sess. 2d Sess.

4903

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00131 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 14 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

the amount over the House by $112 and agreed to the following con- million, which made a round figure of current resolution (H. Con. Res. about $560 million. 1039): We bring to you two items, one a concurrent resolution and the other a Resolved by the House of Representa- conference report. First, why the con- tives (the Senate concurring), That the current resolution? We put in the con- Clerk of the House of Representatives current resolution some 29 items in the enrollment of the bill (H.R. which were originally in the supple- 15857) to amend the District of Colum- mental, but those 29 items are a reduc- bia Police and Fireman’s Salary Act of tion—follow me now—below the figure 1958 to increase salaries of officers and that was in the supplemental when it members of the Metropolitan Police left the House and the figure when it force and the Fire Department, and for left the Senate. other purposes, is authorized and di- It is a complete reduction and a rected to make the following correc- change. It is in the concurrent resolutions in the salary schedule for teach- tion because it could not be in the con- ers, school officers, and certain other ference report, and the reason it could employees of the District of Columbia not be in the conference report is be- Board of Education, which is provided cause it is a reduction in those in section 202(1) of the bill: amounts. (1) In class 3, step 2, strike out The concurrent resolution was ‘‘$16,856’’ and insert in lieu thereof agreed to.(10) ‘‘$16,865’’. (2) In class 3, step 6, strike out Correcting Printing Errors ‘‘18,115’’ and insert in lieu thereof ‘‘18,105’’. § 14.7 The House agreed to a (3) In class 6, group C, principal level III, step 5, strike out ‘‘14,905’’ concurrent resolution au- and insert ‘‘14,095’’.(12) thorizing the Clerk of the House, in the enrollment of a Return of Original Papers to House bill, to correct certain Senate printing errors in the bill as reported from conference to § 14.8 By concurrent resolu- reflect the true intention of tion the Senate requested re- the conferees and the two turn of a House bill erro- Houses. 12. Parliamentarian’s Note: Printing er- ( ) On Oct. 17, 1966, 11 the House, rors in the conference report were by unanimous consent, considered not discovered until after the Senate had acted on the report. These errors 10. Id. at p. 14403. could have been corrected by a star 11. 112 CONG. REC. 27152, 89th Cong. print had they been caught before 2d Sess. the two Houses had acted.

4904

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00132 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 14

neously messaged to the Rescinding Enrollment House as having passed the Senate without amendment; § 14.9 The House, by unani- the Secretary of the Senate mous consent, agreed to a was authorized, upon its re- concurrent resolution return, to transmit the bill to scinding the action of the the House with a Senate Speaker and President of the amendment, and provided Senate in signing an enrolled for the return to the House bill and directing the Clerk of an incorrectly enrolled of the House to reenroll the bill, signed by the Speaker, bill with certain changes. and that the Speaker’s signa- On Apr. 21, 1938,(14) the House ture be rescinded. agreed to the following concurrent On Aug. 8, 1957,(13) the Speak- resolution (S. Con. Res. 30) which er, Sam Rayburn, of Texas, laid had passed the Senate on Mar. 30, 1938: before the House the following concurrent resolution (S. Con. Resolved by the Senate (the House of Res. 46): Representatives concurring), That the action of the Speaker of the House of Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives and the President of Representatives concurring), That the the Senate in signing the enrolled bill House of Representatives return to the (H.R. 5793) for the relief of Josephine Senate the engrossed bill (H.R. 5707) Fontana be, and it is hereby, re- for the relief of the A. C. Israel Com- scinded, and the Clerk of the House be, modity Co., Inc., erroneously messaged and he is hereby, authorized and di- to the House on August 6, 1957, as rected to reenroll the bill with the fol- having passed the Senate on the pre- lowing amendments, viz: . . . strike ceding day without amendment; that out ‘‘Josephine Fontana, . . . $600 in upon its return to the Senate the Sec- full satisfaction of her claim’’ and . . . retary shall transmit to the House the insert . . . ‘‘Nathaniel M. Harvey, as said bill, together with the amendment administrator of the estate of Jose- made by the Senate thereto; that the phine Fontana. . . .’’ enrolled bill, signed by the Speaker of the House and transmitted to the Sen- § 14.10 The House, by unani- ate on yesterday, be returned to the mous consent, agreed to a House, and that the action of the Senate concurrent resolution Speaker in signing said enrolled bill be rescinding the signatures of thereupon rescinded. the two presiding officers on

13. 103 CONG. REC. 14102, 85th Cong. 14. 83 CONG. REC. 5640, 75th Cong. 3d 1st Sess. Sess.

4905

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00133 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 14 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

an enrolled bill and pro- the Senate in signing the enrolled bill viding for its return to the (H.R. 7158) to except yachts, tugs, towboats, and unrigged vessels from Senate. certain provisions of the act of June On May 24, 1956,(15) the House 25, 1936, as amended, be, and it is considered and agreed to the fol- hereby, rescinded; and that the House lowing concurrent resolution (S. of Representatives be, and it is hereby, requested to return to the Senate the Con. Res. 80): engrossed bill. Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring), That the § 14.12 The House, by unani- action of the Speaker pro tempore of mous consent, agreed to a the House of Representatives and of concurrent resolution re- the President of the Senate in signing scinding the action of the the enrolled bill (H.R. 4656) relating to the Lumbee Indians of North Carolina Speaker and Vice President be, and it is hereby, rescinded, and in signing an enrolled bill that the engrossed bill be returned to and requesting the House to the Senate. return to the Senate its message announcing its agree- § 14.11 The House, by unani- ment to an amendment of the mous consent, agreed to a House. Senate concurrent resolution rescinding the action of the On June 4, 1935,(17) the House Speaker and President of the considered the following concur- Senate in signing an enrolled rent resolution (S. Con. Res. 16): bill and requesting the Resolved by the Senate (the House of House to return the en- Representatives concurring), That the grossed copy to the Senate. action of the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the Vice President ( ) On Apr. 5, 1938, 16 the House of the United States, respectively, in considered and agreed to the fol- signing the enrolled bill (S. 2105) to lowing concurrent resolution (S. provide for an additional number of ca- Con. Res. 29): dets at the United States Military Academy, and for other purposes, be, Resolved by the Senate (the House of and the same is hereby, rescinded; and Representatives concurring), That the that the House of Representatives be, action of the Speaker of the House of and it is hereby, requested to return to Representatives and of the President of the Senate the message announcing its agreement to the amendments of the 15. 102 CONG. REC. 8945, 84th Cong. 2d House to the said bill. Sess. 16. 83 CONG. REC. 4775, 75th Cong. 3d 17. 79 CONG. REC. 8645, 74th Cong. 1st Sess. Sess.

4906

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00134 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 14

Reenrollment With a Correc- enroll a House bill with a tion correction. On Oct. 13, 1966,(2) the House § 14.13 The House, by unani- considered and agreed to the fol- mous consent, agreed to a lowing concurrent resolution (S. concurrent resolution re- Con. Res. 113): scinding the action of the Resolved by the Senate (the House of Speaker in signing an en- Representatives concurring), That the rolled bill and authorizing Clerk of the House of Representatives the Clerk to reenroll it with of the United States be authorized to a correction. correct an enrolling error in H.R. 698, to provide for the establishment of the On Aug. 17, 1954,(1) the House Guadalupe Mountains National Park considered and passed the fol- in the State of Texas, and for other purposes, and that section 3(a) of H.R. lowing concurrent resolution (S. 698, shall when corrected read as fol- Con. Res. 106): lows: Resolved by the Senate (the House of ‘‘When title to all privately owned Representatives concurring), That the land within the boundary of the park, subject to such outstanding interests, action of the Speaker of the House of rights, and easements as the Secretary Representatives in signing the enrolled determines are not objectionable. bill (H.R. 1975) to amend section 2201 . . .’’ (3) of title 28, United States Code, to extend the Federal Declaratory Judg- Reenrollment With a Change ments Act to the Territory of Alaska, be rescinded, and that the Clerk of the § 14.15 The House agreed to a House be, and he is hereby authorized and directed, in the reenrollment of concurrent resolution re- the bill, to make the following correc- scinding the action of the tion: Speaker in signing an en- On page 1, line 6 of the engrossed rolled bill and authorizing House bill, strike out the word ‘‘sec- the Secretary of the Senate tion’’ and in lieu thereof insert the to reenroll the bill with a word ‘‘sentence.’’ change. § 14.14 The House, by unani- 2. 112 CONG. REC. 26639, 26640, 89th mous consent, agreed to a Cong. 2d Sess. Senate concurrent resolution 3. Parliamentarian’s Note: The Senate authorizing and directing originated this concurrent resolution the Clerk of the House to re- since the error in the enrollment was in reality a Senate error reflecting a 1. 100 CONG. REC. 14877, 83d Cong. 2d mistake in the engrossment of the Sess. Senate amendment to the House bill.

4907

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00135 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 14 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

On June 16, 1954,(4) Speaker construction at military installations, Joseph W. Martin, of Massachu- and for other purposes, the Secretary setts, laid before the House a con- of the Senate is authorized and directed to make the following correction: current resolution (S. Con. Res. In section 612, strike out ‘‘$50,000’’ 87) which the House considered and insert ‘‘$150,000’’. and agreed to: Resolved by the Senate (the House of § 14.17 The House, by unani- Representatives concurring), That the mous consent, agreed to a action of the Speaker of the House of concurrent resolution au- Representatives in signing the enrolled thorizing the Secretary of bill (S. 2657), to amend the act entitled the Senate to make such cor- ‘‘An act to regulate the practice of the healing art to protect the public health rections in title and section in the District of Columbia,’’ be, and numbers and cross ref- the same is hereby, rescinded; and that erences as may be necessary the Secretary of the Senate be, and he by reason of the omission of is hereby, authorized and directed to a title in an enrolled bill. reenroll the bill with the following change, namely: On page 2, line 6, On Mar. 23, 1942,(6) the House after the word ‘‘or’’, insert the word considered and agreed to the fol- ‘‘by’’. lowing concurrent resolution (S. § 14.16 The House, by unani- Con. Res. 27): mous consent, agreed to a Resolved by the Senate (the House of concurrent resolution au- Representatives concurring), That in enrolling the bill (S. 2208) to further thorizing and directing the expedite the prosecution of the war, Secretary of the Senate to the Secretary of the Senate is author- make certain corrections in ized and directed to make all necessary the enrollment of a Senate corrections in title and section num- bill. bers and cross references as may be necessary by reason of the omission ( ) On Aug. 25, 1966, 5 the House from the enrolled bill of title VIII. considered and agreed to the following concurrent resolution (H. § 14.18 By unanimous consent, Con. Res. 990): the House adopted a concur- Resolved, That in the enrollment of rent resolution authorizing the bill (S. 3105) to authorize certain and directing the Secretary of the Senate, in the enroll- 4. 100 CONG. REC. 8360, 83d Cong. 2d ment of a bill, to make cer- Sess. 5. 112 CONG. REC. 20688, 89th Cong. 6. 88 CONG. REC. 2808, 77th Cong. 2d 2d Sess. Sess.

4908

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00136 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 14

tain conforming changes to Incomplete Enrollment the title of the bill, changes designed to make the title § 14.19 Where in the enroll- conform to amendments ment of a bill a section there- made to the text thereof. of was omitted and the Presi- dent signed the bill as pre- On Oct. 1, 1968 (7) the House sented to him, the Congress, considered and agreed to the fol- by unanimous consent, im- lowing concurrent resolution (H. mediately enacted an amend- Con. Res. 838): ment to the law inserting the CORRECTION OF TITLE OF THE BILL S. omitted section. 698, INTERGOVERNMENTAL COOPERA- (9) TION ACT OF 1968 On July 1, 1954, the House considered and agreed to a joint MR. [CHET] HOLIFIELD [of Cali- resolution (H.J. Res. 553) amend- fornia]: Mr. Speaker, I offer a concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 838) and ing a law (Priv. L. No. 495) to in- ask unanimous consent for its imme- clude a section that had been in- diate consideration. advertently omitted from the en- The Clerk read the concurrent reso- rolled bill sent to the President.(10) lution as follows: Resolved by the House of Rep- Providing for Duplicate En- resentatives (the Senate concurring), rollment That the Secretary of the Senate in the enrollment of the bill (S. 698) to achieve the fullest cooperation and § 14.20 Pursuant to a concur- coordination of activities among the rent resolution brought up levels of government . . . and for other purposes, is authorized and di- 9. 100 CONG. REC. 9566, 83d Cong. 2d rected to correct the title of the bill so as to read: ‘‘An Act to achieve the Sess. fullest cooperation and coordination 10. Parliamentarian’s Note: In the en- of activities among the levels of gov- rollment of H.R. 7258, a private bill ernment . . . and for other pur- for the relief of the Willmore Engi- poses.’’ neering Company, a portion of the THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE: (8) Is bill, section 2, which had been in the there objection to the request of the bill when it was passed by both the gentleman from California? House and the Senate, was erro- There was no objection. neously omitted. The erroneously en- The concurrent resolution was rolled bill was signed by the pre- agreed to. siding officers of the two Houses and approved by the President on June 7. 114 CONG. REC. 28863, 90th Cong. 30, 1954. The omission of section 2 2d Sess. was discovered only after the bill 8. Carl Albert (Okla.). had been approved by the President.

4909

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00137 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 14 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

and agreed to by unanimous since those rules were abrogated consent, the Clerk presented in 1876.(13) A House-enrolled bill, the duplicate copy of an en- having been approved as to form rolled bill to the President by the Committee on House Ad- after the original copy had ministration, and certified by the been lost. Clerk as having originated in the House, is reported to the House. On May 15, 1935,(11) the Speak- Senate enrollments are delivered er (12) laid before the House the to the House after examination following communication: and certification by the Secretary MAY 15, 1935. of the Senate. All enrollments are THE SPEAKER, signed first by the Speaker and House of Representatives, Washington, D.C. then by the Vice President or President pro tempore of the Sen- SIR: Pursuant to the provisions of ate.(14) House Concurrent Resolution 21, Sev- enty-fourth Congress, I have this day Where the Record and Journal, presented to the President of the through oversight, fail to indicate United States the signed duplicate that the Speaker has signed a copy of the enrolled bill, H.R. particular bill, the Speaker an- 6084. . . . nounces to the House the date on Very truly yours, which he has signed the bill and SOUTH TRIMBLE, Clerk of the asks that the permanent record House of Representatives. and Journal be corrected accord- (15) Parliamentarian’s Note: For cir- ingly. cumstances which required this f duplicate enrollment, see § 15.16, infra. Authorization to Sign During Adjournments § 15.1 The House agreed to a § 15 Signing concurrent resolution au-

The practice of the two Houses 13. House Rules and Manual § 575 of Congress in the signing of en- (1981). rolled bills was formerly governed 14. Procedure in the U.S. House of Rep- by joint rules, and has continued resentatives (97th Cong.), Ch. 24 § 11.1. 11. 79 CONG. REC. 7633, 74th Cong. 1st 15. Procedure in the U.S. House of Rep- Sess. resentatives (97th Cong.), Ch. 24 12. Joseph W. Byrns (Tenn.). § 11.2.

4910

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00138 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 15

thorizing the Vice President passed by the two Houses which have and the Speaker to sign en- been examined by the Committee on Enrolled Bills of each House and found rolled bills and joint resolu- truly enrolled. tions of the two Houses that have been duly passed not- Parliamentarian’s Note: The withstanding an adjourn- earlier practice utilized a concur- ment. rent resolution to grant signing authority during an adjournment. (16) On Aug. 24, 1935, the House Under a more recent practice, considered and agreed to the fol- each House obtained its own lowing concurrent resolution (H. unanimous-consent permission. Con. Res. 39): Since Jan. 5, 1981, the Speaker Resolved by the House of Representa- has had permanent authority to tives (the Senate concurring), That not- sign enrollments whether or not withstanding the adjournment of the the House is in session. See Rule first session of the Seventy-fourth Con- gress, the President of the Senate and I clause 4, House Rules and Man- the Speaker of the House of Represent- ual § 624 (1981). atives be, and they are hereby, authorized to sign any enrolled bills or joint § 15.2 The Senate agreed to a resolutions duly passed by the two resolution authorizing the Houses and which have been examined acting President pro tempore by the Committee on Enrolled Bills of each House and found truly enrolled. to sign enrolled bills and joint resolutions during ad- (17) Similarly, on July 8, 1943, journments and recesses for the House considered and agreed the remainder of the session. to the following concurrent resolu- ( ) tion (S. Con. Res. 18): On Dec. 12, 1963, 18 the Senate considered and agreed to the fol- Resolved by the Senate (the House of lowing resolution (S. Res. 235): Representatives concurring), That notwithstanding the adjournment of the Resolved, That notwithstanding ad- two Houses as authorized by Senate journments or recesses of the Senate Concurrent Resolution 17, the Presi- during the remainder of the present dent of the Senate and the Speaker of session of the Congress, the Secretary the House of Representatives be and be authorized to receive messages from they are hereby, authorized to sign en- the House, and the President pro tem- rolled bills and joint resolutions duly pore or the Acting President pro tempore be authorized to sign during such 16. 79 CONG. REC. 14583, 74th Cong. 1st adjournments or recesses enrolled bills Sess. 17. 89 CONG. REC. 7516, 78th Cong. 1st 18. 109 CONG. REC. 24329, 88th Cong. Sess. 1st Sess.

4911

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00139 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 15 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

and joint resolutions passed by the two mous consent to sign en- Houses and found truly enrolled. rolled bills and joint resolu- Parliamentarian’s Note: See tions passed by the two Senate Rule 1, paragraph 3, deal- Houses, notwithstanding a ing with the authority of the sine die adjournment. President pro tempore and the On Oct. 2, 1964,(20) Mr. Carl Al- acting President pro tempore to bert, of Oklahoma, was granted sign enrolled bills. Signing author- the following unanimous-consent ity during periods of adjournment request: is customarily granted by unanimous consent. MR. ALBERT: Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that notwith- § 15.3 The House agreed to a standing the sine die adjournment of the House, the Clerk be authorized to concurrent resolution au- receive messages from the Senate and thorizing the Speaker and that the Speaker be authorized to sign President pro tempore of the any enrolled bills and joint resolutions Senate to sign enrolled bills, duly passed by the two Houses and notwithstanding ‘‘any’’ ad- found truly enrolled. THE SPEAKER: (1) Without objection, journment of the two Houses it is so ordered. to a day certain. There was no objection. ( ) On July 2, 1964, 19 the House Parliamentarian’s Note: Since considered and agreed to the fol- Jan. 5, 1981, permanent authority lowing concurrent resolution (H. to receive messages from the Sen- Con. Res. 322): ate is carried in Rule III clause 5 Resolved, That notwithstanding any [House Rules and Manual § 647a adjournment of the two Houses until (1981)], and the Speaker is au- July 20, 1964, the Speaker of the thorized to sign enrolled bills by House of Representatives and the Rule I clause 4 [House Rules and President pro tempore of the Senate Manual § 624 (1981)]. be, and they are hereby, authorized to sign enrolled bills and joint resolutions duly passed by the two Houses and § 15.5 Notwithstanding any ad- found truly enrolled. journment of the House between Friday and Monday, § 15.4 Under a more recent the Speaker was authorized practice, the Speaker was by unanimous consent to usually authorized by unani- 20. 110 CONG. REC. 23788, 88th Cong. 19. 110 CONG. REC. 15897, 15898, 88th 2d Sess. Cong. 2d Sess. 1. John W. McCormack (Mass).

4912

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00140 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 15

sign enrolled bills and joint ized to sign any enrolled bills and resolutions passed by the joint resolutions duly passed by two Houses. the two Houses and found truly On Dec. 13, 1963,(2) Mr. Carl Al- enrolled. bert, of Oklahoma, asked unani- There was no objection. mous consent that notwith- § 15.7 By unanimous consent, standing any adjournment of the the Speaker was, on one oc- House until Monday next the casion, authorized for the re- Clerk may be authorized to remainder of the session to ceive messages from the Senate sign enrolled bills and joint and the Speaker may be author- resolutions notwithstanding ized to sign any enrolled bills and adjournments of the House. joint resolutions duly passed by ( ) the two Houses and found truly On Aug. 10, 1961, 5 Mr. John enrolled. W. McCormack, of Massachusetts, There was no objection. asked unanimous consent that notwithstanding any adjournment § 15.6 The Speaker pro tem- of the House during the present pore, who had been elected session of the 87th Congress the to serve in that capacity, was Clerk be authorized to receive authorized to sign enrolled messages from the Senate and bills and joint resolutions that the Speaker be authorized to notwithstanding an adjourn- sign any enrolled bills and joint ment of the House for only resolutions duly passed by the two one day. Houses and found truly enrolled. There was no objection. On Sept. 21, 1961,(3) Mr. Carl Albert, of Oklahoma, asked unani- § 15.8 The House agreed to a mous consent that notwith- unanimous-consent request standing the adjournment of the that, notwithstanding sine House until the next day the die adjournment, the Speak- Speaker pro tempore (4) be author- tempore (see H. Jour. 949, 87th 2. 109 CONG. REC. 24553, 88th Cong. Cong. 1st Sess.). See § 15.14, infra, 1st Sess. as to necessity of House approval of 3. 107 CONG. REC. 20572, 87th Cong. designation of Speaker pro tempore 1st Sess. to permit his authorization to sign 4. Mr. John W. McCormack, of Massa- enrolled bills. chusetts, had been elected on Aug. 5. 107 CONG. REC. 15320, 87th Cong. 31, 1961, to serve as Speaker pro 1st Sess.

4913

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00141 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 15 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

er be authorized to sign en- H.R. 7963. An act to amend the Small Business Act of 1953, as amend- rolled bills duly passed. ed; and On Dec. 21, 1943,(6) Mr. John H.R. 11414. An act to amend section W. McCormack, of Massachusetts, 314(c) of the Public Health Service Act. made the following request: § 15.10 The Speaker an- Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous con- nounced the signing of en- sent that, notwithstanding the sine die rolled bills after the House adjournment of the first session of the had adjourned to a day cer- Seventy-eighth Congress, the Speaker be authorized to sign enrolled bills and tain. joint resolutions, duly passed by the On July 26, 1948,(9) the Speak- two Houses and examined by the Com- er (10) announced that pursuant to mittee on Enrolled Bills and found House Concurrent Resolution 219 truly enrolled. of the 80th Congress he had made There was no objection. appointments to special committees and signed enrolled bills dur- Announcements as to Bills ing an adjournment to a day cer- Signed During Adjournment tain. § 15.9 The Speaker informed § 15.11 The Speaker an- the House when the elected nounced that following the Speaker pro tempore had, President’s return of an en- pursuant to authority grant- rolled bill and the reenrolled, signed certain enrolled ment thereof with a correc- bills during adjournment. tion, he (the Speaker) had thereafter signed the bill On July 14, 1958,(7) the Speak- during a period of adjourn- er (8) made the following statement. ment: On July 20, 1964,(11) the Speak- The Chair desires to announce that, er (12) made the following an- pursuant to the authority granted on Thursday, July 10, 1958, the Speaker nouncement: pro tempore did on July 11, 1958, sign The Chair desires to announce that the following enrolled bills of the after the President returned the bill, House: 9. 94 CONG. REC. 9363, 80th Cong. 2d 6. 89 CONG. REC. 10958, 78th Cong. 1st Sess. Sess. 10. Joseph W. Martin, Jr. (Mass.). 7. 104 CONG. REC. 13675, 85th Cong. 11. 110 CONG. REC. 16249, 88th Cong. 2d Sess. 2d Sess. 8. Sam Rayburn (Tex.). 12. John W. McCormack (Mass.).

4914

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00142 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 15

H.R. 10053, the Clerk of the House, turn to the Senate its message an- pursuant to the provisions of House nouncing its agreement to the House Concurrent Resolution 323, 88th Con- amendments. gress, caused the bill to be reenrolled with a correction. The Speaker, pursu- § 15.13 The House agreed to a ant to the authority granted him by Senate resolution requesting House Concurrent Resolutions 322 and the House to rescind the ac- 323 [to sign enrolled bills during an adjournment], 88th Congress, did on tion of the Speaker in sign- July 8, 1964, sign the same. ing an enrolled bill of the House and that such bill be Vacating Signatures returned to the Senate. (14) § 15.12 The House agreed to a On July 30, 1942, the Speak- (15) Senate concurrent resolution er pro tempore laid before the requesting that the action of House the following resolution from the Senate: the Speaker in signing an enrolled bill be rescinded and Resolved, That the Secretary be di- that the House return to the rected to request the House of Rep- resentatives to rescind the action of Senate the message announc- the Speaker in signing the enrolled bill ing the Senate’s agreement (H.R. 7297) entitled ‘‘An act author- to certain House amend- izing the assignment of personnel from ments. departments or agencies in the executive branch of the Government to cer- ( ) On June 3, 1953, 13 the House, tain investigating committees of the by unanimous consent, considered Senate and House of Representatives, and agreed to the following con- and for other purposes,’’ and that the current resolution (S. Con. Res. House of Representatives be further 31): requested to return the above-numbered engrossed bill to the Senate. Resolved by the Senate (the House of THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE: With- Representatives concurring), That the out objection, it is so ordered. action of the Speaker of the House of There was no objection. Representatives in signing the enrolled bill (S. 1550) to authorize the Presi- Signing of Bills by Speaker Pro dent to prescribe the occasions upon which the uniform of any of the Armed Tempore Forces may be worn by persons honor- ably discharged therefrom be, and it is § 15.14 The House approved hereby, rescinded, and that the House the designation of a Speaker be, and it is hereby, requested to re- 14. 88 CONG. REC. 6713, 77th Cong. 2d 13. 99 CONG. REC. 6000, 83d Cong. 1st Sess. Sess. 15. Alfred L. Bulwinkle (N.C.).

4915

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00143 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 15 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

pro tempore, thereby ena- of Massachusetts, be, and he is hereby, bling him to sign enrolled elected Speaker pro tempore during bills. the absence of the Speaker. Resolved, That the President and the On Feb. 24, 1949,(16) Mr. Mike Senate be notified by the Clerk of the Mansfield, of Montana, offered the election of Hon. John W. McCormack following privileged resolution (H. as Speaker pro tempore during the ab- Res. 116): sence of the Speaker. (18) Resolved, That the designation of The Speaker then offered the Hon. John W. McCormack, a Rep- explanation below for the action resentative from the State of Massa- taken: chusetts, as Speaker pro tempore be This action is taken for two reasons: approved by the House, and that the First, the Speaker will not be here President of the United States and the Monday and Tuesday, and the imme- Senate be notified thereof. . . . diate necessity is that there might be MR. [FRANCIS H.] CASE of South Da- some enrolled bills that must be kota: As I understand, this is the cus- signed. tomary resolution to meet a situation, so that bills may be duly enrolled and Signing of Duplicate Copy of presented for signature? Bill MR. MANSFIELD: The gentleman is correct. . . . § 15.16 The House agreed to a The resolution was agreed to. concurrent resolution au- § 15.15 The Speaker invited thorizing the Speaker and consideration of a resolution the Vice President to sign a electing a Speaker pro tem- duplicate copy of an enrolled pore in order that enrolled bill and directing the Clerk bills might be signed in his of the House to transmit it to absence. the President. On June 9, 1949,(17) the House On May 15, 1935,(1) the House, considered and agreed to the fol- by unanimous consent, considered lowing privileged resolution (H. and agreed to the following con- Res. 243): current resolution (H. Con. Res. 21): Resolved, That Hon. John W. McCor- mack, a Representative from the State Resolved by the House of Representa- tives (the Senate concurring), That the 16. 95 CONG. REC. 1489, 81st Cong. lst Sess. 18. Sam Rayburn (Tex.). 17. 95 CONG. REC. 7509, 81st Cong. lst 1. 79 CONG. REC. 7598, 74th Cong. 1st Sess. Sess.

4916

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00144 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 15

Speaker of the House of Representa- be suspended to allow the tives and the President of the Senate be, and they are hereby, authorized to Speaker to sign an enrolled sign a duplicate copy of the enrolled bill. bill H.R. 6084, entitled ‘‘An act to au- (5) thorize the city of Ketchikan, Alaska, On Feb. 26, 1964, upon adop- to issue bonds . . .’’ and that, to issue tion of a motion to rise offered by bonds . . .’’ and that the Clerk of the Mr. Wright Patman, of Texas, the House be directed to transmit the same to the President of the United Committee of the Whole, at the States.(2) request of the Speaker, suspended consideration of a bill (H.R. 9022) § 15.17 Where the Speaker to amend the International Devel- signs a duplicate copy of an opment Association Act. enrolled bill (the original The Speaker (6) then signed an having been lost) pursuant to enrolled bill (H.R. 8363) to amend a concurrent resolution au- the Internal Revenue Code of thorizing such signing, he in- 1954 to reduce individual and cor- forms the House of that fact. porate income taxes.(7) On May 27, 1938, (3) the Speak- Mr. Patman then moved that er (4) announced that pursuant to the House resolve itself into the Senate Concurrent Resolution 37 Committee of the Whole to con- the Chair had signed a duplicate tinue consideration of H.R. 9022. copy of a Senate bill (S. 3532). The motion was agreed to. Suspension of Proceedings to Parliamentarian’s Note: The Permit Signing Committee is not required to vote to rise, but may rise ‘‘informally,’’ § 15.18 Proceedings in the without motion, to allow the Committee of the Whole may Speaker to receive messages from

2. This concurrent resolution was 5. 110 CONG. REC. 3653, 3654, 88th adopted following the receipt of a Cong. 2d Sess. communication from the President 6. John W. McCormack (Mass.). advising the House that the original 7. Parliamentarian’s Note: President copy of the enrolled bill (H.R. 6084) Lyndon B. Johnson (Tex.) has sched- presented to the President had been uled a ceremony in connection with lost. The President recommended his signing of this bill, the Revenue that a duplicate bill be sent to him Act of 1963, later in the day. The pursuant to authorization by a con- White House has informed the Par- current resolution. liamentarian of this fact and the 3. 83 CONG. REC. 7645, 75th Cong. 3d Speaker has agreed to expedite the Sess. handling of the enrollment in the 4. William B. Bankhead (Ala.). House.

4917

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00145 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 15 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

the President or the Senate. Since of the Senate rules, then signed the rules were amended in 1981 three enrolled bills (H.R. 131, to permit the Speaker to sign en- H.R. 3574, and H.J. Res. 180) rolled bills, whether or not the which had been signed by the House is in session (H. Res. 5, Speaker and messaged to the Sen- ate. 97th Cong.), the concept of an ‘‘informal rising’’ of the Committee of the Whole has also been used to permit the Speaker to lay enrolled § 16. Recalling Bills From bills before the House. See House the President Rules and Manual § 625 (1983). Recall by Concurrent Resolu- Senate Practice tion § 15.19 In the Senate, an acting § 16.1 The House agreed to a President pro tempore, des- concurrent resolution re- ignated in writing by the questing the President to return an enrolled bill. elected President pro tem- ( ) pore, signs enrolled bills. On Feb. 5, 1932, 10 the House, ( ) by unanimous consent, considered On June 20, 1963, 8 the legisla- and agreed to the following con- tive clerk of the Senate read the current resolution (S. Con. Res. following letter: 13): U.S. SENATE, PRESIDENT PRO TEMPORE, Resolved by the Senate (the House of Washington, D.C, June 20,1963. Representatives concurring), That the To the Senate: shall have the right to name in open Being temporarily absent from the Senate or, if absent, in writing, a Senate, I appoint Hon. Birch Bayh, a Senator to perform the duties of the Senator from the State of Indiana, to Chair, including the signing of duly perform the duties of the Chair during enrolled bills and joint resolutions my absence. but such substitution shall not ex- CARL HAYDEN, President pro tempore. tend beyond an adjournment, except by unanimous consent; and the Sen- The acting President pro tem- ator so named shall have the right to pore, pursuant to the authority name in open session, or, if absent, granted by Rule I, paragraph 3 (9) in writing, a Senator to perform the duties of the Chair, but not to extend 8. 109 CONG. REC. 11253, 88th Cong. beyond an adjournment, except by lst Sess. unanimous consent.’’ 9. Senate Rule I, paragraph 3 provides 10. 75 CONG. REC. 3449, 72d Cong. lst that ‘‘The President pro tempore Sess.

4918

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00146 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 16

President of the United States be, and authorized and directed, in the enroll- is hereby, requested to return to the ment of said resolution, to make the Senate the enrolled bill (S. 2199) enti- following correction: On the last line of tled ‘‘An Act exempting building and the enrolled resolution strike out loan associations from being adjudged ‘‘waived’’ and insert ‘‘reserved.’’ bankrupts.’’ § 16.3 The House agreed to a Recalling for Reenrollment concurrent resolution requesting the President to re- § 16.2 The House agreed to a turn an enrolled bill, rescind- concurrent resolution re- ing the action of the Vice questing the President to re- President and the Speaker in turn to the House an en- signing the bill, and direct- rolled House joint resolution, ing the Secretary of the Sen- rescinding the signatures of ate in the reenrollment of the two presiding officers the bill to make certain cor- and authorizing the Clerk of rections. the House to reenroll it with (12) corrections. On Apr. 12, 1937, the House, by unanimous consent, agreed to (11) On July 26, 1956, the House, the following concurrent resolu- by unanimous consent, considered tion (S. Con. Res. 8): and agreed to the following concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring), That the 271): President of the United States be, and Resolved by the House of Representa- he is hereby requested to return to the tives (the Senate concurring), That the Senate the enrolled bill (S. 1455) . . . President of the United States is re- that if and when the said bill is requested to return to the House of Rep- turned by the President, the action of resentatives the enrolled House joint the Speaker of the House of Represent- resolution (H.J. Res. 511). . . . If and atives and of the President pro tem- when said resolution is returned by the pore of the Senate in signing the said President, the action of the presiding bill be deemed to be rescinded; and officers of the two Houses in signing that the Secretary of the Senate be, said resolution shall be deemed re- and is hereby, authorized and directed, scinded, and the Clerk of the House is in the reenrollment of the said bill, to make the following correction, viz: In 11. 102 CONG. REC. 14770, 84th Cong. the language inserted by the engrossed 2d Sess. The Senate acted on this resolution on July 26, 1956, 102 12. 81 CONG. REC. 3397, 75th Cong. lst CONG. REC. 14648. The President re- Sess. The President returned this turned the bill to the House on July bill to the Senate on Apr. 15, 1937, 27, 1956, 102 CONG. REC. 15178. 81 CONG. REC. 3497, 3498.

4919

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00147 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 16 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

House amendment no. 4, on page 2, at Recall and Postponement the end of line 11 of the engrossed bill, strike out the word ‘‘lieutenant’’ and § 16.5 The House agreed to a insert the words ‘‘lieutenant colonel.’’ concurrent resolution re- § 16.4 The House agreed to a questing the President to re- concurrent resolution return an enrolled bill, rescind- questing the President to re- ing the action of the two pre- turn to the House an en- siding officers in signing said rolled House bill, rescinding bill, and postponing the bill the signatures of the two indefinitely. presiding officers, and di- On May 13, 1953,(14) the House recting the Clerk to reenroll considered and agreed to the fol- the bill to conform with a lowing concurrent resolution (H. conference report adopted Con. Res. 99): by the two Houses. Resolved by the House of Representa- On Sept. 4, 1962,(13) the House, tives (the Senate concurring), That the by unanimous consent, considered President of the United States is re- and agreed to the following con- quested to return to the House the en- current resolution (H. Con. Res. rolled bill (H.R. 1101) for the relief of Daniel Robert Leary. If and when said 519): bill is returned by the President, the Resolved by the House of Represent- action of the Presiding Officers of the atives (the Senate concurring), That two Houses in signing said bill shall be the President of the United States is deemed rescinded, and the bill shall be requested to return to the House of postponed indefinitely. Representatives the enrolled bill (H.R. 10062) to extend the application of certain laws to American Samoa. If and Recall and Return to Senate when said bill is returned by the Presi- dent, the action of the presiding officer § 16.6 The Senate considered of the two Houses in signing in said and postponed indefinitely a bill shall be deemed rescinded; and the concurrent resolution re- Clerk of the House is authorized and questing the President to re- directed to reenroll said bill in accordance with the conference report therein turn to the House an en- adopted by the two Houses. rolled joint resolution, and

13. 108 CONG. REC. 18405, 87th Cong. 14. 99 CONG. REC. 4895, 83d Cong. lst 2d Sess. The Senate concurred in Sess. The Senate concurred in this this resolution on Sept. 4, 1962, 108 resolution on May 14, 1953, 99 CONG. REC. 18482. The President ac- CONG. REC. 4915. The President re- ceded to this request on Sept. 11, turned the bill on May 19, 1953, 99 1962, 108 CONG REC 19092. CONG. REC. 5139.

4920

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00148 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 16

requesting the House to re- On July 3, 1947,(17) the fol- turn the joint resolution to lowing message was recorded in the Senate. the Record as having been re- ( ) ceived in the Senate from the On Jan. 10, 1952, 15 the Vice House: resident (16) laid before the Senate A message from the House of Rep- the following concurrent resolu- resentatives, by Mr. Maurer, one of its tion (S. Con. Res. 53): reading clerks, informed the Senate that the President of the United States Resolved by the Senate (the House of having returned to the House of Rep- Representatives concurring), That the resentatives the enrolled bill (H.R. President of the United States be, and 493) to amend section 4 of the act enti- he is hereby, requested to return to the tled ‘‘An act to control the possession, House of Representatives the enrolled sale, transfer, and use of pistols and other dangerous weapons in the Dis- joint resolution (H. J. Res. 289) to ter- trict of Columbia,’’ approved July 8, minate the state of war between the 1932 (sec. 22, 3204 D.C. Code, 1940 United States and the Government of ed.),’’ in compliance with the request Germany; that if and when returned contained in Senate Concurrent Reso- the action of the Presiding Officers in lution No. 22; and returned the en- signing the joint resolution be re- grossed copy of said bill to the Senate. scinded, and that the House be requested to return the engrossed joint § 16.8 The President returned resolution to the Senate. to the Senate an enrolled bill Action on the concurrent resolu- pursuant to a request con- tion was indefinitely postponed. tained in a concurrent resolution adopted by the two Message to Senate When En- Houses. rolled Bill Returned to House, On June 13, 1960,(18) the Vice Engrossment Transmitted to President laid before the Senate Senate 17. 93 CONG. REC. 8203, 80th Cong. lst Sess. S. Con. Res. 22 was adopted by § 16.7 The House transmitted the Senate on June 30, 1947, 93 to the Senate an engrossed CONG. REC. 7876. The House con- bill, the enrolled bill having curred on July 1, 1947, 93 CONG. been returned to the House REC. 8012. Following a conference on by the President pursuant to the bill, the conference report was a Senate concurrent resolu- agreed to in the Senate on July 25, 1947, 93 CONG. REC. 10139, and in tion. the House on July 26, 1947, 93 CONG. REC. 10494. 15. 98 CONG. REC. 71, 72, 82d Cong. 2d Sess. 18. 106 CONG. REC. 12370, 12371, 86th 16. Alben W. Barkley (Ky.). Cong. 2d Sess. S. Con. Res. 109 was

4921

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00149 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 16 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

the following message from the On July 3, 1947,(19) the Speak- President of the United States: er (20) laid before the House the To the Senate of the United States: following message from the Presi- In compliance with the request contained in the resolution of the Senate dent of the United States: (the House of Representatives concur- To the House of Representatives: ring therein), I return herewith S. 1892 entitled ‘‘An Act to authorize Sec- In compliance with the request con- retary of the Interior to construct, op- tained in the resolution of the Senate erate, and maintain the Norman (the House of Representatives concur- project, Oklahoma, and for other pur- ring therein), I return herewith H.R. poses.’’ DWIGHT D. EISENHOWER, 493, an act to amend section 4 of the THE WHITE HOUSE, act entitled ‘‘An act to control the pos- June 11, 1960. session, sale, transfer, and use of pis- § 16.9 The President returned tols and other dangerous weapons in to the House an enrolled bill the District of Columbia,’’ approved pursuant to a request con- July 8, 1932 (sec. 22, 3204 D.C. Code, tained in a concurrent reso- 1940 ed.). HARRY S TRUMAN, lution passed by the two THE WHITE HOUSE, Houses. July 3, 1947.

C. VETO POWERS § 17. In General Alexander Hamilton as a ‘‘qualified negative’’ designed to provide The term ‘‘veto’’ is nowhere to a defense for the executive against be found in the Constitution. the Congress and ‘‘to increase the Rather, what is provided is a pro- chances in favour of the commu- cedure, under article 1, section 7, nity against the passing of bad whereby the President partici- pates with the Congress in the en- laws, through haste, inadvertence, ( ) actment of laws. His power under or design.’’ 1 article I to disapprove (veto) a bill Article I, section 7, paragraph 2 presented to him was described by of the Constitution provides:

adopted by the Senate on June 6, 19. 93 CONG. REC. 8260, 80th Cong. lst Sess. See also § 16.7, supra. 1960, 106 CONG. REC. 11905, and 20. Joseph W. Martin, Jr. (Mass.). concured in by the House on June 7, 1. Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist, 1960, 106 CONG. REC. 12009. No. 73.

4922

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00150 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 17

Every Bill which shall have passed the bill will become law automati- the House of Representatives and the cally, without his signature. How- Senate, shall, before it become a Law, ever, if before the end of that 10- be presented to the President of the United States; If he approve he shall day period the Congress adjourns sign it, but if not he shall return it, sine die and thereby prevents the with his Objections to that House in return of the bill, the bill does not which it shall have originated, who become law if the President has shall enter the Objections at large on taken no action (i.e., approval or their Journal, and proceed to recon- disapproval) regarding it. This lat- sider it. If after such Reconsideration two thirds of that House shall agree to ter procedure is commonly re- pass the Bill, it shall be sent, together ferred to as a ‘‘pocket veto.’’ The with the Objections, to the other authority to ‘‘pocket veto’’ during House, by which it shall likewise be re- intrasession and intersession ad- considered, and if approved by two journments has been the subject thirds of that House, it shall become a of litigation, which is discussed in Law. But in all such Cases the Votes of § 18, infra. both Houses shall be determined by Yeas and Nays, and the Names of the Collateral Reference Persons voting for and against the Bill shall be entered on the Journal of each For a chronological list of Presidential House respectively. vetoes and congressional action thereon, from 1789 to 1968, see Senate Li- If any Bill shall not be returned by brary, Presidential Vetoes, U.S. Gov- the President within ten Days (Sun- ernment Printing Office, Washington, days excepted) after it shall have been D.C. 1969. presented to him, the Same shall be a Law, in like manner as if he had f signed it, unless the Congress by their Adjournment prevent its Return, in Ten-day Period which Case it shall not be a Law. Thus the President has a 10- § 17.1 The 10-day period given day period (Sundays excepted), be- the President under the Con- ginning at midnight on the day of stitution in which to approve presentation to him,(2) in which to or reject a bill may be con- approve or disapprove a bill. He sidered as beginning at mid- can sign the bill into law or he night of the day on which the can return it to the House of its bill is presented to him. origination with a message detail- On Sept. 14, 1959,(3) Mr. Ken- ing why he chooses not to sign. If neth B. Keating, of New York, he fails to act during that period, 3. 105 CONG. REC. 19553, 86th Cong. 2. See § 17.1, infra. 1st Sess.

4923

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00151 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 17 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

propounded a parliamentary in- the President until after his quiry in the Senate concerning the return from Europe on Sept. veto message of the President de- 7, was returned without the livered to the House on a private President’s approval on Sept. bill (H.R. 2717). He inquired 14, 1959. whether more than 10 days had On Sept. 14, 1959,(6) the Speak- expired since the bill was pre- er (7) laid before the House the sented to the President under the veto message of the President re- provisions of article I, section 7, of ceived on that day of a private bill the Constitution.(4) (H.R. 2717). The bill had been The Presiding Officer (5) resent to the President on Aug. 31. sponded that the 10-day limita- After the veto message had tion begins to run as of midnight been read the Speaker declared: on the day on which a bill is presented to the President for his ap- The objections of the President will proval. be spread at large upon the Journal, Parliamentarian’s Note: The day and, without objection, the bill and message will be referred to the Com- on which the bill is presented to mittee on the Judiciary and ordered to the President is not counted in be printed. the computation. There was no objection.

§ 17.2 A private bill sent to the § 17.3 Whether a bill has been White House on Aug. 31, acted on by the President 1959, but not presented to within the 10 days allowed him by the Constitution is a 4. H.R. 2717 was presented at the White House on Aug. 31, 1959. How- legal question and not open ever, it was not presented to the to determination by the Pre- President until after his return from siding Officer of the Senate. Europe on Sept. 7. The enrolled bill, On Sept. 14, 1959,(8) Senator when returned to the House with the veto message, carried a stamped no- Kenneth B. Keating, of New York, tation added at the White House, raised several parliamentary in- reading as follows: ‘‘Aug. 31, 1959. quiries in the Senate regarding Held for presentation to the Presi- the purported veto by President dent upon his return to the United States.’’ The issue of whether the 6. 105 CONG. REC. 19697, 86th Cong. veto message was beyond the 10-day 1st Sess. period is discussed in §§ 17.3 and 7. Sam Rayburn (Tex.). 17.4, infra. 8. 105 CONG. REC. 19553, 19554, 86th 5. Howard W. Cannon (Nev.). Cong. 1st Sess.

4924

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00152 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 17

Eisenhower of a private bill (H.R. question for legal determination, and 2717): not for the Chair to determine. Mr. President, I rise to propound a § 17.4 The Court of Claims has parliamentary inquiry: On March 17, ruled that where the Presi- 1959, the House of Representatives dent was on a trip abroad passed, and on August 27, 1959, the Senate passed, House bill 2717, for the and, with congressional ac- relief of Eber Bros. Wine & Liquor quiescence, had requested Corp. that bills from Congress The bill was sent to the White House were to be received at the on August 31, 1959. However, I am in- White House for presentation formed that it was not brought to the President’s personal attention, by his to him only upon his return staff, until approximately 5 days ago. to the United States, the The President has today disapproved President’s veto of a bill the bill and returned it here. . . . more than 10 days after de- My question is whether the status of livery to the White House but a bill passed by the Congress is af- less than 10 days from his re- fected in any way by the President’s purported veto of the bill this morning, turn to the country was time- more than 10 days after it was deliv- ly. ered at the White House. On Oct. 16, 1964, the U.S. THE PRESIDING OFFICER: (9) The Court of Claims took up the ques- Chair states that if the President has tion of the effectiveness of a Presi- vetoed the bill, it being a House bill, it dential veto in Eber Brothers Wine will go back to the House for further (10) action. If the House overrides the veto, & Liquor Corporation v U.S. it will be submitted to the Senate, and On Aug. 31, 1959, the Congress there will be an opportunity to act had delivered at the White House upon it. . . . a private bill (H.R. 2717) for the MR. KEATING: My inquiry, which the relief of the Eber Brothers Wine Chair may be unwilling or should re- and Liquor Corporation. The frain from responding to, is this: Is any President was not in the country action by the Congress necessary if the at the time. He returned on Sept. President retains a bill for more than 7, and on Sept. 14, he vetoed the 10 days before he acts on it? bill and sent his veto message to THE PRESIDING OFFICER: According to the Constitution, the bill should be- the House of Representatives. The come a law if it has not been acted House did not reconsider the bill. upon within 10 days after it has been The Eber Bros. Corp. filed suit presented to the President. The matter in the Court of Claims asking for of whether 10 days have elapsed is a 10. 337 F2d 624 (Ct. Cl.); cert. denied, 9. Howard W. Cannon (Nev.). 380 U.S. 950 (1964).

4925

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00153 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 17 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

the relief provided in H.R. 2717, sage of the bill through the Con- claiming that the bill had become gress. A further step is necessary, law since the President had taken and the initiation of that step— no action regarding it within 10 presentation to the President— days of its presentation to him on lies with the Congress.’’ (11) Aug. 31. The Court went on to say that The Court denied the plaintiff’s the manner of presentation is a contention. It ruled that the ‘‘pres- matter two sides are free to agree entation’’ to the President con- on between themselves. ‘‘[T]hough templated in article I, section 7 of personal presentation to the Presi- the Constitution took place in this dent is not mandatory, either the case on Sept. 7, when the Presi- Congress or the President can in- dent had properly vetoed the bill sist on such delivery [,]’’ in order to protect the duties of consider- within 10 days after that date. ation and reconsideration as- To reach this conclusion the signed them by the Constitution. Court reasoned that article I sec- However, and most importantly, tion 7 contemplates two important ‘‘. . . If personal delivery is not duties to be performed by the demanded by either side, presen- President and the Congress re- tation can be made in any agreed spectively: the President must manner or in a form established consider a bill, and the Congress by one party in which the other must reconsider it in the event it acquiesces [.]’’ (12) is vetoed by the President. The The Court found that in this President has 10 days (Sundays case, and in light of the practice excepted) to consider the bill after during previous administrations it is ‘‘presented’’ to him, and the regarding Presidential trips Congress has an indefinite time to abroad, the Congress had acqui- reconsider a veto provided it has esced in President Eisenhower’s not by its adjournment prevented wish that bills delivered to the its return. White House not be ‘‘presented’’ to ‘‘It is also important,’’ the Court him until his return from said, ‘‘that under the careful abroad.(13) words of the Constitution, the § 17.5 The 10 days provided in President’s limited time for con- the Constitution during sidering a bill does not begin until the measure is presented to him. 11. Id. at p. 629. That period does not mechanically 12. Id. commence at the end of the pas- 13. Id. at pp. 630–34.

4926

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00154 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 17

which the President may Bill Signed in Prior Capacity hold a bill without action as Presiding Officer of Senate runs from the day it is presented to him and not from § 17.6 The President has ve- the day noted in the Record toed a bill he had previously as delivered at the White signed as Presiding Officer House. of the Senate. (16) On Dec. 1, 1943,(14) the Speak- On Apr. 19, 1945, the Speak- (17) er (15) laid before the House the er laid before the House the veto message of the President on veto message of President Harry the bill (H.R. 1155) for the relief Truman relating to a private bill of two military officers, where it (H.R. 2055). appeared that, although the bill Parliamentarian’s Note: After had been at the White House for Vice President Truman had more than 10 days, the President signed the enrolled bill as Presi- acted on the bill within 10 days of dent of the Senate, and after the its presentation to him. In the enrolled bill had been sent to the veto message the President stated White House, President Franklin that the bill was presented to him D. Roosevelt died. The Vice Presi- on Nov. 25, 1943. The Congres- dent became President and the sional Record of Nov. 12, 1943, bill was presented to him for ap- records that this bill was pre- proval as President. sented to the President for his ap- Approval of Bill Similar to proval on that date. The enrolled One Previously Vetoed copy of the bill returned by the President along with his veto mes- § 17.7 The President vetoed a sage bore a White House stamp Senate joint resolution but dated Nov. 12, 1943, along with subsequently signed a simi- the handwritten notation ‘‘for for- lar House joint resolution warding.’’ modified by an amendment. The House did not vote on the On May 22, 1935,(18) Mr. Wil- returned bill but, by unanimous liam M. Citron, of Connecticut, ob- consent, referred the bill and message to the Committee on Claims. 16. 91 CONG. REC. 3577, 79th Cong. 1st Sess. 14. 89 CONG. REC. 10190, 78th Cong. 1st 17. Sam Rayburn (Tex.). Sess. 18. 79 CONG. REC. 8026, 74th Cong. 1st 15. Sam Rayburn (Tex.). Sess.

4927

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00155 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 17 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

tained unanimous consent to take where the Congress adjourns be- from the table House Joint Reso- fore the expiration of that time in lution 107, authorizing the Presi- such a manner as to prevent the dent of the United States to pro- return of the bill to the origi- claim Oct. 11, of each year, Gen- nating House. eral Pulaski’s Memorial Day. The The Supreme Court first consid- resolution was agreed to with a ered the question of the pocket committee amendment limiting veto in 1929 in what is commonly the memorial day to Oct. 11, 1935, referred to as the Pocket Veto ( ) rather than Oct. 11, of each year. Case. 19 In this case a Senate bill The Senate on May 28 passed the (S. 3185) authorizing certain In- House joint resolution and the dian tribes to offer their claims to the Court of Claims was pre- President signed it on June 6. sented to the President on June Parliamentarian’s Note: This 24, 1926. On July 3 of that year resolution was similar to Senate the first session of the 69th Con- joint resolution (S.J. Res. 21) gress adjourned sine die. The 10- which had previously passed both day period for Presidential ap- Houses and which provided for an proval expired on July 6, by which annual commemorative day, each time the President had neither October, without limitation. The signed the bill nor returned it to Senate joint resolution was vetoed the Senate with his reasons for by the President on Apr. 11, 1935. disapproval. Taking the position that the bill had become law, the Indian tribes § 18. Effect of Adjourn- affected sought adjudication of ment; The Pocket Veto their claims in the Court of Claims in accordance with the The President is not restricted terms of the bill. The United to signing a bill on a day when States demurred to their petition Congress is in session. He may on the ground that the bill had sign within 10 days (Sundays ex- not become law. The Court of cepted) after the bill is presented Claims sustained the demurrer to him, even if that period extends and dismissed the petition. The beyond the date of the final ad- Supreme Court granted certiorari (20) to determine journment of Congress. The Presi- in the case dent is said to ‘‘pocket veto’’ a bill 19. Okanogan, et al. v U.S., 279 U.S. 655 where he takes no action on the (1929). bill during the 10-day period and 20. 278 U.S. 597. 4928

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00156 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 §18

whether ‘‘. . . within the meaning negative over legislation which re- of the last sentence [of art. I, § 7, quires him to return vetoed bills paragraph 2] . . . Congress by the to the Congress along with his adjournment on July 3 prevented written objections. Thus, ‘‘. . . the the President from returning the provision as to the return of a bill bill within 10 days, Sundays ex- within a specified time is to be cepted, after it had been pre- construed in a manner that will ( ) sented to him. . . .’’ 1 The Court give effect to the reciprocal rights answered this question in the af- and duties of the President and of firmative, and held that the bill Congress and not enable him to ( ) did not become law. 2 defeat a bill of which he dis- Mr. H. William Sumners, of approves by a silent and ‘absolute Texas, a member of the Com- veto,’ that is, a so-called ‘pocket mittee on the Judiciary submitted veto,’ which neither discloses his a brief as amicus curiae in the objections nor gives Congress an case in which he argued that only opportunity to pass the bill over a final adjournment of the Con- them. . . .’’ (3) gress, terminating its legislative To this the Court responded existence, would prevent the that the President does indeed President from returning a bill for reconsideration within the mean- have only a qualified negative ing of the Constitution and that over legislation which requires the during interim adjournments the return of a disapproved bill along President could return a bill to an with his written objections. To agent of the House in which the carry out this ‘‘monumentous bill originated to be presented as duty,’’ however, the President unfinished legislative business must have the full amount of time when that House reconvened. allotted to him by the Constitu- Counsel for the petitioners ar- tion. ‘‘. . . And it is plain that gued further that the term ‘‘ten when the adjournment of Con- days’’ in the Constitution should gress prevents the return of a bill be construed as meaning 10 ‘‘leg- within the allotted time, the fail- islative days’’ so that the period ure of the bill to become a law would cease running while the cannot properly be ascribed to the Congress was not in session. disapproval of the President . . . The amicus curiae argued that but is attributable solely to the ac- the President has only a qualified tion of Congress in adjourning before the time allowed the Presi- 1. 279 U.S. 655, 674. 2. Id. at p. 692. 3. Id. at p. 676.

4929

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00157 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 18 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

dent for returning the bill had ex- its members are dispersed. pired. . . .’’ (4) . . .’’ (5) The Court rejected the conten- Finally, the Court found that tion of the counsel for the peti- the Congress had acquiesced in tioners that the 10-day limitation the ‘‘pocket vetoes’’ of Presidents in the Constitution should be con- since the administration of James strued as 10 ‘‘legislative’’ days Madison, and that, ‘‘long settled since it could find no precedent or and established practice is a con- reason to so modify the plain sideration of great weight in a meaning of the words used. And proper interpretation of constitu- for like reasons it rejected the tional provisions of this char- contention of the amicus curiae acter.’’ (6) that the term ‘‘adjournment’’ as The Supreme Court again con- used in article I section 7, para- sidered the question of the ‘‘pocket graph 2 means the final adjourn- veto,’’ albeit indirectly, in 1938 in ment of Congress. On the con- the case of Wright v United trary, it found that the term ad- States.(7) journment as used in other parts Senate bill No. 713 of the 74th of the Constitution is not limited Congress, having passed both to a final adjournment. Houses, was presented to the The Court then considered the President on Friday, Apr. 24, contention that the President may 1936. On Monday, May 4, 1936, return a vetoed bill to an agent of the Senate took a recess until the House in which it originated noon, Thursday, May 7, 1936, when that House is not in session. while the House of Representa- The Court found that ‘‘. . . under tives remained in session. S. 713 the constitutional mandate [a ve- was vetoed by the President and toed bill] is to be returned to the returned along with his message ‘House’ when sitting in an orga- of disapproval to the Secretary of nized capacity for the transaction of business and having authority 5. As authority for its finding that the term ‘‘House’’ means a constitutional to receive the return, enter the quorum assembled for the trans- President’s objections on its jour- action of business, the Court cited nal, and proceed to reconsider the Missouri Pac. Ry. Co. v Kansas, 248 bill; and that no return can be U.S. 276, 280, 281, 283: and 1 Cur- made to the House when it is not tis’ Constitutional History of the in session as a collective body and United States, 486, n. 1. 6. 279 U.S. 655, 689. 4. Id. at pp. 678, 679. 7. 302 U.S. 583.

4930

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00158 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 §18

the Senate on May 5.(8) When the section 7, clause 2, that would Senate reconvened on May 7, the have prevented the President veto message of the President was from returning a vetoed bill with laid before the Senate, recorded in his objections. The Court found the Journal, and referred to the that the definition of ‘‘the Con- Committee on Claims. No further gress’’ in the Constitution is pre- action was taken on the bill. cise. Both the Senate and the The bill proposed to grant juris- House of Representatives con- diction to the Court of Claims to stitute the Congress.(11) hear the case of David A. Wright. The Court further answered the Mr. Wright subsequently sought objection of the petitioner that a adjudication of his case in the vetoed bill could not properly be Court of Claims, contending that returned to the Secretary of the S. 713 had become law. The Court Senate when that body was in re- of Claims denied his petition, and cess: the Supreme Court granted certio- . . . The Constitution does not de- (9) rari. fine what shall constitute a return of a The Court held that S. 713 had bill or deny the use of appropriate not become law since the Presi- agencies in effecting the return. dent had followed a valid veto pro- Nor was there any practical dif- cedure. The Court found that ficulty in making the return of the bill since the Senate was in recess for during the recess. The organization of the Senate continued and was intact. less than three days while the The Secretary of the Senate was House of Representatives re- functioning and was able to receive, mained in session in accordance and did receive, the bill. . . . To say with article I, section 5, clause 4, that the President cannot return a bill of the Constitution,(10) this was when the House in which it originated not an ‘‘adjournment’’ of Congress is in recess during the session of Con- within the meaning of article I, gress, and thus afford an opportunity for the passing of the bill over the President’s objections, is to ignore the 8. The 10-day constitutional period for plainest practical considerations and Presidential consideration would by implying a requirement of an artifi- have expired on the next day, May 6. cial formality to erect a barrier to the 9. 301 U.S. 681. exercise of a constitutional right.(12) 10. That is, ‘‘Neither House, during the Session of Congress, shall, without A third decision regarding the the Consent of the other, adjourn for pocket veto was handed down by more than three days, nor to any other Place than that in which the 11. U.S. Const. art. I, § 1. two Houses shall be sitting.’’ 12. 302 U.S. 583, 589, 590.

4931

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00159 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 18 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Senator Edward M. Kennedy, of District of Columbia in 1974, in Massachusetts, a supporter of the Kennedy v Sampson.(13) The Court bill in the Senate, sought a declar- there held that a bill—allegedly atory judgment in a U.S. district pocket-vetoed—did become a law, court that S. 3418 had become and an intrasession adjournment public law. The court granted the of Congress did not prevent the declaratory judgment based on his President from returning the bill finding that the Congress by ad- where appropriate arrangements journing for the Christmas holi- had been made for the receipt of days did not prevent the return of Presidential messages during the the bill within the meaning of ar- adjournment. ticle I, section 7, and that the bill Kennedy v Sampson involved S. was, therefore, not subject to a 3418 of the 91st Congress (the pocket veto by the President. Family Practice of Medicine Act), Judge Waddy cited both the which passed both Houses and Pocket Veto and Wright cases to was presented to the President on support his conclusion. From the Dec. 14, 1970. On Dec. 22, 1970, Pocket Veto case he cited the fol- Congress adjourned by concurrent lowing language as an underlying resolution for the Christmas holi- rationale for the court’s decision days, the Senate until Dec. 28, in that case: and the House until Dec. 29. On ‘‘Manifestly it was not intended that Dec. 24, the last day of the 10-day instead of returning the bill to the period for Presidential consider- House itself, as required by the constitutional provision, the President ation, the President issued a should be authorized to deliver it, dur- memorandum of disapproval on ing an adjournment of the House, to the bill which he did not deliver to some individual officer or agent not au- the Senate, although the Sec- thorized to make any legislative record retary of the Senate had pre- of its delivery, who should hold it in his own hands for days, weeks, or per- viously been authorized to receive haps months—not only leaving open such messages during the ad- possible questions as to the date on journment.(14) which it had been delivered to him, or

13. 364 F Supp 1075 (D.D.C. 1973), af- receive messages from the President firmed, 511 F2d 430 (C.A.D.C. 1974). of the United States during the ad- 14. The Secretary of the Senate has journment from Dec. 22 to Dec. 28. been authorized by unanimous con- See also Procedure in the U.S. House sent, on Dec. 22, 1970 [116 CONG. of Representatives (97th Cong.), Ch. REC. 43221, 91st Cong. 2d Sess.], to 24 § 12.1.

4932

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00160 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 §18

whether it had in fact been delivered out his signature to the Clerk of to him at all, but keeping the bill in the House, who had been author- the meantime in a state of suspended animation until the House resumes its ized to receive messages from the sitting, with no certain knowledge on President during an adjournment the part of the public as to whether it to a day certain, and the Presi- had or had not been seasonably deliv- dent asserted in his veto message ered, and necessarily causing delay in its reconsideration which the Constitu- that he had ‘‘pocket vetoed’’ the tion evidently intended to avoid.’’ 279 bill during the adjournment of the U.S. at 684. House to a day certain. The House Judge Waddy then cited the regarded the President’s return of opinion of the Court in the Wright the bill without his signature as a case where a direct comment was veto within the meaning of article made on this language: 1, section 7 of the Constitution ‘‘These statements show clearly the and proceeded to reconsider and sort of dangers which the Court envis- to pass the bill over the Presi- aged. However . . . they appear to be dent’s veto, after postponing con- illusory when there is a mere tem- sideration to a subsequent day. porary recess.’’ 302 U.S. at 595. Subsequently, on Nov. 21, 1974, Judge Waddy found this rea- the Senate also voted to override soning compelling, in spite of the the veto and pursuant to 1 USC fact that the case before him dif- § 106a the enrolling clerk of the fered from the Wright case in that Senate forwarded the bill to the only one House was in recess in Archives for publication as a pub- the latter while both Houses were lic law. The Administrator of Gen- in recess in the former when the eral Services at the Archives, 10-day period for Presidential consideration expired: upon instructions from the De- partment of Justice, declined to ‘‘. . . The Senate returned on the promulgate the bill as public law third day after the final day for the President to act. The interim two days on the day received. The question would have caused no long delay in de- as to the efficacy of the congres- livery of the bill; not keeping it in sus- sional action in passing the bill pended animation. In three days the over the President’s veto was public would have been promptly and properly informed of the President’s mooted when the House and Sen- objections, and the purposes of the con- ate passed on Nov. 26, 1974, an stitutional provisions would have been identical bill which was signed satisfied.’’ into law on Dec. 7, 1974 (Pub. L. In the 93d Congress, the Presi- No. 93–516). See also Kennedy v dent returned a House bill with- Jones, 412 F Supp 353 (D.D.C. 4933

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00161 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 18 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

1976); and for a discussion of the the President announced the pock- constitutionality of intersession or et veto on Apr. 11, 1944, of the intrasession pocket vetoes see bill (S. 555) for the relief of Almos Kennedy, ‘‘Congress, The Presi- W. Glasgow. dent, and The Pocket Veto,’’ 63 Parliamentarian’s Note: An- Va. L. Rev. 355 (1977). See also nouncement to the Congress of the most recent edition of the pocket vetoes have taken various House Rules and Manual § 112 forms. On Apr. 9, 1956, the Presi- (annotation following Art. I, § 7 of dent transmitted to Congress a the Constitution). copy of a press release announcing

f his ‘‘pocket veto’’ of a bill (H.R. 3963) for the relief of Ashot and Form of Notification of Pocket Ophelia Knatzakanian. This press Veto release was attached to a veto message of another bill, but it was § 18.1 On the first meeting day not printed in the Congressional of the Senate after the Con- Record. gress has taken an adjournment to a day certain, the § 18.2 The President pocket ve- President notified that body toed three bills during a two- of his approval of certain month adjournment to a day bills and, in the same mes- certain, and wrote separate sage, his pocket veto of one memorandums explaining his bill. reasons for so doing in each On Apr. 12, 1944,(15) the Senate instance. met after an adjournment that On July 19, 1943,(16) there was began on Apr. 2. A message from recorded in the Journal memoran- the President was presented an- dums of disapproval from the nouncing that he had approved a President of three bills he had bill (S. 662) authorizing pensions pocket vetoed. They were: (1) H.R. for certain physically or mentally 986, an act to define misconduct helpless children as well as a bill for compensation and pension pur- (S. 1243) authorizing the construc- poses; (2) H.R. 1712, an act for tion and operation of demonstra- the relief of Sarah Elizabeth tion plants to produce synthetic Holliday Foxworth and Ethel liquid fuels. In the same message Allene Brown Haberfeld; and (3)

15. 90 CONG. REC. 3408, 78th Cong. 2d 16. 89 CONG. REC. 7551, 78th Cong. 1st Sess. Sess.

4934

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00162 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 19

H.R. 1396, an act making certain President to approve part of a bill regulations with reference to fer- and disapprove another part of tilizers or seeds that may be dis- the same measure. However, agi- tributed by agencies of the United tation for such authority occasion- States. ally has arisen when measures § 18.3 The President informed have been presented to the Presi- dent for his approval which in- the House that he had with- cluded unrelated provisions, some held his approval of numer- of which did not have the Presi- ous bills during an adjourn- dent’s endorsement or support. ment to a day certain. Members have offered amend- On July 26, 1948,(17) there were ments attempting to include a received in the House during a pe- clause in a bill granting the Presi- riod of adjournment several mes- dent a veto power with respect to sages from the President announc- an item in that bill,(19) though the ing his disapproval of numerous constitutionality of such a pro- bills. posal has not been determined, The Congress had adjourned on but general executive authority to June 19, 1948, pursuant to House disapprove only part of a bill does Concurrent Resolution 218, until Dec. 31, 1948. The President’s not exist. Numerous constitutional memoranda of disapproval of each amendments have been intro- of these bills were dated July 2, duced in the past to grant the 1948, more than 10 days (exclud- President item veto authority, but ing Sunday) after the Congress these proposals have not been had adjourned.(18) adopted.(20) Suggestions have also been made that the Congress address, legislatively, the definition § 19. Proposals for Item of the term ‘‘bill’’ as used in the Veto Constitution. Item Veto and Executive Au- There is no express authority under the Constitution for the thority

17. 94 CONG. REC. 9368–73, 80th Cong. § 19.1 To an authorization bill 2d Sess. for public works, an amend- 18. See House bills 851, 1733, 1779, 3499, 1910, 4199, 4590, 6184, and 19. See §§ 19.1, 19.2, infra. 6818 in Calendars of the United 20. Charles J. Zinn, The Veto Power of States House of Representatives and the President, House Committee on History of Legislation, final edition, the Judiciary, 82d Cong. 2d Sess. 80th Cong. (1947–1948). (Committee Print 1951), p. 34.

4935

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00163 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 19 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

ment vesting item veto and relates to the bill. Therefore, the power in the President was Chair overrules the point of order. held to be germane and in § 19.2 To an appropriation bill, order. an amendment proposing to On Mar. 11, 1958,(1) Mr. Donald give the President item veto E. Tewes, of Wisconsin, offered an power was held to be legisla- amendment to the bill (S. 497) au- tion and not in order. thorizing certain public works on On May 14, 1953 (3) Mr. Frank- rivers and harbors for purposes of lin D. Roosevelt, Jr., of New York, navigation. The amendment gave proposed an amendment to the the President authority to veto Treasury and Post Office Appro- certain items provided for in the priation Act of 1954 (H.R. 5174) bill, as follows: giving the President item veto Sec. 211. For the purpose of dis- power over each separate appro- approval by the President, each para- priation in the bill. graph of each of the preceding sections, shall be considered a bill within the Mr. Gordon Canfield, of New meaning of article I, section 7, of the Jersey, raised the point of order Constitution of the United States, and against the amendment that it each such paragraph which is dis- was legislation on an appropria- approved shall not become law unless tion bill. repassed in accordance with the provi- (4) sions of section 7, article I, of the Con- The Chairman sustained the stitution relating to the repassage of a point of order on the grounds that bill disapproved by the President. the amendment was legislation Mr. Frank E. Smith, of Mis- upon an appropriation bill. sissippi, raised a point of order Mr. Roosevelt then offered an against the amendment on the amendment stating that each sec- ground that such language is en- tion or item of appropriation in tirely out of order on any type of the bill shall be deemed a sepa- legislation since there is no provi- rate bill for purposes of approval sion in the Constitution for an or disapproval by the President. item veto. The Chair (2) responded: Mr. Canfield then raised the . . . The Chair does not pass upon same point of order that this point constitutional questions. The amend- of order that this amendment was ment seems to be pertinent to the bill legislation on appropriation bill.

1. 104 CONG. REC. 4020, 85th Cong. 2d 3. 99 CONG. REC. 4939, 4940, 83d Cong. Sess. Ist Sess. 2. Howard W. Smith (Va.). 4. Louis E. Graham (Pa.).

4936

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00164 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 20

The Chairman sustained the with the President’s objec- point of order for that same rea- tions, the veto message is son. laid before the House, read by the Clerk, and the objections spread at large on the § 20. Return of Vetoed Journal. Bills On May 28, 1948,(7) the Speaker pro tempore (8) laid before the The Constitution provides, in article I, section 7, clause 2, that House the veto message of Presi- if the President does not sign a dent Harry Truman on the bill bill presented to him ‘‘. . . he (H.R. 1308) for the relief of H. C. shall return it, with his Objections Biering, the message having been to that House in which it shall received in the House on the pre- have originated, who shall enter vious day shortly before adjourn- the Objections at large on their ment. The message was read by Journal, and proceed to reconsider the Clerk and the President’s veto it.’’ spread on the Journal. By unani- It is the usual rule that when a mous consent, the bill and the vetoed bill is received in the House from the President, the message were referred to the House proceeds at once to con- Committee on the Judiciary. sider it. When a veto message is laid before the House the question Announcement as to Receipt of of passage is considered as pend- Veto Message ing (5) and a quorum is required to be present to consider the ques- § 20.2 Parliamentarian’s Note: tion.(6) Where there are veto messages on the Speaker’s desk, f he may announce that fact so that the Record and Journal Presentation of Veto Message will show the receipt of the to the house messages and to notify the § 20.1 When a bill is vetoed Members that consideration and returned to the House thereof is pending.

5. See 7 Cannon’s Precedents §§ 1097– 7. 94 CONG. REC. 6697, 80th Cong. 2d 1099. Sess. 6. Id. at § 1094. 8. Charles A. Halleck (Ind.).

4937

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00165 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 20 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

On Aug. 2, 1946,(9) the Speak- and said to contain a veto message on er (10) announced that the Chair H.R. 7509, ‘‘An act making appropriations for civil functions administered had received veto messages on the by the Department of the Army, cer- bills H.R. 4660 and H.R. 6442 and tain agencies of the Department of the that they would be laid before the Interior, and the Tennessee Valley Au- thority for the fiscal year ending June House at the proper time. 30, 1960, and for other purposes.’’ Respectfully yours, Veto Messages Received During RALPH R. ROBERTS, Adjournment Clerk, U.S. House of Representatives. Parliamentarian’s Note: H.R. § 20.3 When a veto message 7509 had been transmitted to the from the President is re- President on Aug. 18, 1959. The ceived by the Clerk of the 10-day constitutional limitation House at a time when the for a veto would have expired House is not in session, the Aug. 29. The House had ad- Clerk transmits the sealed journed from Thursday, Aug. 27, envelope containing the mes- to Monday, Aug. 31, and the sage to the Speaker with a Clerk, pursuant to Wright v United States (302 U.S. 583), had letter explaining the cir- authority to receive and did re- cumstances. ceive the message during a time On Aug. 31, 1959,(11) the Speak- when the House was not in ses- er (12) laid before the House the sion. following communication from the Likewise, on July 24, 1961,(13) Clerk of the House: the Speaker (14) laid before the AUGUST 28, 1959. House the following communica- The Honorable SPEAKER, tion: House of Representatives. JULY 21, 1961.

IR S : I have the honor to transmit 13. 107 CONG. REC. 13151, 87th Cong. herewith a sealed envelope addressed 1st Sess. to the Speaker of the House of Rep- For other instances see 111 CONG. resentatives from the President of the REC. 14845, 89th Cong. 1st Sess., United States, received in the Clerk’s June 28, 1965; 110 CONG. REC. office at 3:15 p.m. on August 28, 1959, 21410, 88th Cong. 2d Sess., Sept. 2, 1964; 110 CONG. REC. 6095, 88th 9. 94 CONG. REC. 10744, 79th Cong. 2d Cong. 2d Sess., Mar. 24, 1964; 96 Sess. CONG. REC. 9193, 81st Cong. 2d 10. Sam Rayburn (Tex.). Sess., June 26, 1950; and 86 CONG. 11. 105 CONG. REC. 17397, 86th Cong. REC. 13601, 76th Cong. 3d Sess., Ist Sess. Oct. 28, 1940. 12. Sam Rayburn (Tex.). 14. Sam Rayburn (Tex.).

4938

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00166 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 20

The Honorable the SPEAKER, On Sept. 5, 1945,(15) the Speak- House of Representatives. er (16) laid before the House the SIR: I have the honor to transmit veto messages of the President on ( ) herewith a sealed envelope addressed five bills 17 received in the House to the Speaker of the House of Rep- after an adjournment period in ex- resentatives from the President of the cess of 10 days. The Clerk had United States, received in the Clerk’s been authorized on July 21, 1945, office at 11:15 a.m. on July 21, 1961, to receive messages from the and said to contain a veto message on President during the adjournment H.R. 4206, ‘‘An act for the relief of Mel- of the House, which was sched- vin H. Baker and Frances V. Baker.’’ uled to last from July 21 to Oct. 8, Respectfully yours, 1945. The Congress reconvened on RALPH R. ROBERTS, Sept. 5 pursuant to a recall order Clerk, U.S. House of Representatives. of its leadership. The Speaker Parliamentarian’s Note: H.R. then laid the messages and bills 4206 had been transmitted to the before the House and, by separate President on July 11, 1961. The motion on each bill, and by unani- 10-day period within which the mous consent, referred them to the committees from which they President could veto the bill had originated. would have expired on July 22. The House had adjourned from Delivery of Veto Message at Thursday, July 20, to Monday, Joint Session July 24, and the Clerk, pursuant to procedure recognized as valid § 20.5 The President person- in Wright v United States (302 ally delivered a veto message U.S. 583), had authority to receive 15. 91 CONG. REC. 8322–24, 79th Cong. the message during a time when 1st Sess. the House was not in session. 16. Sam Rayburn (Tex.). 17. The bills were: (1) H.R. 259 for the § 20.4 Where the President ve- relief of George Gottlieb; (2) H.R. toed several bills during an 3477 authorizing improvement of certain harbors in the interest of adjournment period in ex- commerce and navigation; (3) H.R. cess of 10 days, and sent his 952 for the relief of the Morgan veto messages to the Clerk of Creamery Company; (4) H.R. 1856 for the relief of Southwestern Drug the House, upon reconvening Company; and (5) H.R. 3549 to pro- the Speaker laid the mes- vide for the conveyance of certain sages and bills before the weather bureau property to Norwich House and referred them to University, Northfield, Vt. All of the veto messages were dated before the committees from which Aug. 1, 1945, the date on which the they originated. Senate adjourned. 4939

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00167 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 20 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

to a joint session of the Con- that the Senate shall meet with the gress. House in joint session, and we are told that the veto message of the President, On May 22, 1935,(18) President or the objections which the President Franklin D. Roosevelt personally proposes to make to a bill which Con- addressed a joint session of the gress has passed shall not be returned to the House, the body in which the Congress in order to deliver his legislation was originated, but that it veto message of the bill (H.R. shall be returned to a joint session of 3896), providing for the imme- both bodies. It is that procedure which diate payment to veterans of the I condemn. It is that procedure which face value of their adjusted-serv- I claim is not countenanced by the Constitution. It is in violation of the ice certificates. The President ad- Constitution of the United States that dressed both Houses pursuant to this legislation should be returned to House Concurrent Resolution 22. the joint body rather than to the body He said, ‘‘As to the right and pro- in which the legislation originated. It will be in violation of the Constitution priety of the President in address- if the objections shall be made to the ing the Congress in person, I am joint body rather than that they should very certain that I have never in be entered in the Journal of the House the past disagreed, and will never by the normal and usual procedure in the future disagree, with the which has been employed in this country for a century and a half.(20) Senate or the House of Represent- atives as to the constitutionality Senator J. W. Robinson, of of the procedure. With your per- Utah, responded: mission, I should like to continue The discussion as to what message is from time to time to act as my to be heard appears to me to be more or less irrelevant. The concurrent reso- own messenger.’’ lution provides for a joint session of The Senate had considered and the two Houses of the Congress to hear passed the concurrent resolution such communications as the President (H. Con. Res. 22) authorizing this shall be pleased to make. joint session on the preceding There is no limitation in the Con- (19) stitution or in the rules of the two day. Senator Frederick Steiwer, Houses on the occasion or the purposes of Oregon, objected to the resolu- for which joint sessions may be held. tion, observing: Therefore it is entirely within the discretion or judgment of the two Houses My objection to the concurrent reso- when joint sessions shall convene.(21) lution is that it seeks to involve the Senate in this procedure. It proposes Parliamentarian’s Note: As its first business upon reconvening 18. 79 CONG. REC. 7993–96, 74th Cong. 1st Sess. 20. Id. at p. 7897. 19. Id. at pp. 7896–902, 7943. 21. Id. at p. 7900.

4940

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00168 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 20

following the President’s address, Referral of Vetoed Bill Mes- the House voted to override the saged From Senate Presidential veto on H.R. 3896.(22) The vote in the Senate on May 23 § 20.7 The Senate passed a pri- (legislative day of May 13) failed vate bill over the President’s of a two-thirds majority, so that veto and messaged it to the the veto was sustained.(1) House, where it was referred to a committee. Notification of Senate Action On July 5, 1952,(5) the Speak- on Vetoed Bill er (6) laid before the House a bill (S. 827)—passed by the Senate § 20.6 The Senate notifies the over the President’s veto—for the House when it passes a Sen- relief of Fred P. Hines. ate bill over a Presidential Mr. Emanuel Celler, of New veto. York, moved that the bill and veto On Aug. 13, 1958,(2) the Speak- message be referred to the Com- er (3) laid before the House the fol- mittee on the Judiciary and or- lowing message from the Senate: dered printed. IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, The motion was agreed to. August 12, 1958. Correcting Errors in Veto Mes- The Senate having proceeded to reconsider the bill (S. 2266) entitled ‘‘An sages act to provide a method for regulating and fixing wage rates for employees of § 20.8 The White House, having Portsmouth, N.H., Naval Shipyard,’’ discovered an error in a veto returned by the President of the message transmitted to the United States with his objections to House, sent a further mes- the Senate, in which it originated, and passed by the Senate on reconsider- sage to the House correcting ation of the same, it was the error. Resolved, That the said bill pass, On May 25, 1960,(7) the Speak- two-thirds of the Senators present hav- er (8) laid before the House a coming voted in the affirmative.(4) 87 CONG. REC. 6886, 77th Cong. 1st 22. Id. at pp. 7996, 7997. Sess., Aug. 7, 1941. 1. Id. at pp. 8066, 8067. 5. 98 CONG. REC. 9608, 82d Cong. 2d 2. 104 CONG. REC. 17354, 85th Cong. Sess. 2d Sess. 6. Sam Rayburn (Tex.). 3. Sam Rayburn (Tex.). 7. 106 CONG. REC. 11060, 86th Cong. 4. See also 94 CONG. REC. 8523, 80th 2d Sess. Cong. 2d Sess., June 16, 1948; and 8. Sam Rayburn (Tex.).

4941

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00169 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 20 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

munication from the President of to contributions of employees,’’ and my the United States; this message message of July 31 appertaining there- to. (shown below) was read and re- HARRY TRUMAN, ferred to the Committee on Ways THE WHITE HOUSE, and Means. August 1, 1946. MAY 23, 1960. THE SPEAKER: Without objection, the DEAR MR. SPEAKER: An error ap- request of the President will be com- pears in my message of disapproval on plied with, and the Clerk will transmit H.R. 7947, a bill relating to the income the papers requested. tax treatment of nonrefundable capital There was no objection. contributions to Federal National Parliamentarian’s Note: The Mortgage Association. President transmitted to the In the last sentence of the second House three veto messages shortly paragraph of my message the word ‘‘purchases’’ should be inserted in lieu after the convening of the House of the word ‘‘sells’’. on Aug. 1. The Speaker observed Sincerely, that included therewith was an DWIGHT D. EISENHOWER. apparent veto of H.R. 3420, although he believed that the Presi- Return of Veto Message to dent had intended to sign the bill. President It was suggested that the Presi- dent send a message to the House § 20.9 The House complied requesting the return of the bill with the request of the Presi- before the veto was laid before the dent that a bill and veto mes- House. Such a message was re- sage be returned to him. ceived from the President, which On Aug. 1, 1946,(9) the Speak- was laid before the House and er (10) laid before the House the agreed to, and the bill H.R. 3420 following message from the Presi- was returned to the President dent: without ever having been read to To the House of Representatives: the House. It should be noted that I hereby request the return of H.R. if the veto message on H.R. 3420 3420, a bill ‘‘to provide for refunds to had been laid before the House railroad employees in certain cases so and read, then under the prece- as to place the various States on an dent established in the Senate on equal basis, under the Railroad Unem- Aug. 15, 1876 (4 Hinds’ Prece- ployment Insurance Act, with respect dents § 3521) the message and bill 9. 92 CONG. REC. 10651, 79th Cong. 2d could not have been returned to Sess. the President. The above bill was 10. Sam Rayburn (Tex.). signed by the President on Aug. 2, 4942

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00170 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 21

1946, and became Public Law No. On Oct. 10, 1940,(14) the Speak- 79–599 of the 79th Congress. er (15) laid before the House the veto message of the President of the bill (H.R. 7179) providing for § 21. Motions Relating to the naturalization of Louis D. Vetoes Friedman. Mr. Samuel Dickstein, of New York, moved to refer the When a vetoed bill is laid before bill and veto message to the Com- the House the question of pas- mittee on Immigration and Natu- sage, the objections of the Presi- ralization. dent to the contrary notwith- Mr. John E. Rankin, of Mis- standing, is pending, but motions to refer to committee,(11) to post- sissippi, reserved the right to ob- pone to a day certain, or to lay on ject, saying: the table are in order. Motions of This bill can only be referred to a this nature are within the con- committee by unanimous consent. stitutional mandate that the THE SPEAKER: No; a motion is in House ‘‘shall proceed to recon- order. ( ) sider’’ a vetoed bill. 12 MR. RANKIN: I understand [but is it Motions to take from the table a privileged?] Any Member can demand vetoed bill, or to discharge a ve- a vote on this at any time, on a Presi- toed bill from a committee, are dent’s veto. privileged.(13) THE SPEAKER: A motion to refer to a committee takes preference, of course. f MR. RANKIN: I did not think a motion to refer to a committee was privi- Precedence of Motion to Refer leged. My understanding is that any Member can demand a vote at any § 21.1 When a vetoed bill is time. laid before the House and THE SPEAKER: A motion to refer at read, a motion to refer to this stage is a privileged motion and committee takes precedence has preference, under the rule. over the question of passage over the veto. Effect of Defeat of Motion to Postpone 11. See § 21.1, infra. 12. See U.S. Const. art. I, § 7, clause 2, § 21.2 Where a motion to post- and 7 Cannon’s Precedents §§ 1105, pone further consideration 1114. 13. See 4 Hinds’ Precedents §§ 3532, 14. 86 CONG. REC. 13522, 76th Cong. 3d 3550; and 5 Hinds’ Precedents Sess. § 5439. See also § 21.8, infra. 15. Sam Rayburn (Tex.).

4943

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00171 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 21 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

of a veto message to a day The previous question was ordered. certain is defeated, the ques- THE SPEAKER: The question now re- tion recurs, in the absence of curs upon the motion of the gentleman from Alabama that further consider- any other motion, on passing ation of the veto message be postponed the bill over the objections of until Monday. the President. The question was taken; and on a di- On Jan. 24, 1936,(16) the Speak- vision (demanded by Mr. Bankhead) er (1) laid before the House the there were ayes 131 and noes 189. MR. [JOHN J.] O’CONNOR [of New veto message of the President on York]: Mr. Speaker, I demand the yeas the bill (H.R. 9870) to provide for and nays. the immediate payment of world The yeas and nays were refused. war adjustment service certifi- So the motion was rejected. cates and for the cancellation of THE SPEAKER: The question is, Will unpaid interest accrued on loans the House on reconsideration agree to secured by such certificates. pass the bill, the objections of the Mr. William B. Bankhead, of President to the contrary notwithstanding? Alabama, moved that consideration of the President’s message Effect of Defeat of Motion to be postponed until the next Mon- Refer day. After short debate Mr. Bankhead then moved the pre- § 21.3 When a motion to refer a vious question on his motion. Mr. vetoed bill to a committee is John E. Rankin, of Mississippi, voted down, the question re- raised a parliamentary inquiry as curs on the passage of the to whether a vote on the veto mes- bill over the objections of the sage would be in order if the mo- President. tion to postpone were defeated: On Oct. 10, 1940,(2) the Speak- MR. RANKIN: And a preferential mo- er (3) laid before the House the tion will be in order for an immediate veto message of the President of vote on the veto? the bill (H.R. 7179) providing for THE SPEAKER: It will be the only motion before the House. the naturalization of Louis D. The question is on the motion of the Friedman. Mr. Samuel Dickstein, gentleman from Alabama [Mr. of New York, moved that the bill Bankhead] on the previous question. and veto message be referred to

16. 80 CONG. REC. 975, 976, 74th Cong. 2. 86 CONG. REC. 13534, 76th Cong. 3d 2d Sess. Sess. 1. Joseph W. Byrns (Tenn.). 3. Sam Rayburn (Tex.).

4944

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00172 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 21

the Committee on Immigration Referral to Committee by and Naturalization. Unanimous Consent Mr. John E. Rankin, of Mis- sissippi, raised a parliamentary § 21.5 A veto message from the inquiry as to whether the question President was, by unanimous before the House would be on the consent, referred to a com- overriding of the veto if the mo- mittee. tion to refer was voted down. The On July 24, 1961,(5) the Speak- Speaker responded that the ques- er (6) laid before the House the tion of overriding the President’s veto message of the President on veto would recur if the motion to the bill (H.R. 4206) for the relief refer to committee was voted of Melvin H. Baker and Frances down. V. Baker. The Speaker stated: Referral to Committee by Mo- The objections of the President will tion be spread at large upon the Journal, and, without objection, the bill and § 21.4 A veto message from the message will be referred to the Com- President may on motion be mittee on the Judiciary and ordered to referred to the originating be printed. committee and ordered There was no objection.(7) printed. Objections to Referral On Aug. 14, 1967,(4) the Speak- er laid before the House the veto § 21.6 Where an objection is message of the President on the raised to a unanimous-con- bill (H.R. 11089) to increase life sent request to refer a veto insurance coverage for govern- message to a committee, and ment employees, officials, and the House adjourns without Members of Congress. other disposition of the mes- Mr. Dominick V. Daniels, of sage, the request for referral New Jersey, moved that the bill may be renewed. and message be referred to the

Committee on Post Office and 5. 107 CONG. REC. 13151, 13152, 87th Civil Service and ordered to be Cong. 1st Sess. printed. 6. Sam Rayburn (Tex.). The motion was agreed to. 7. See also 111 CONG. REC. 21244, 21245, 89th Cong. 1st Sess., Aug. 23, 4. 113 CONG. REC. 22438, 90th Cong. 1965; and 105 CONG. REC. 19697, 1st Sess. 86th Cong. 1st Sess., Sept. 14, 1959.

4945

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00173 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 21 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

On Sept. 13, 1965,(8) the Speak- the bill (H.R. 17809) to fix the pay er (9) laid before the House the practices applied to federal ‘‘blue veto message of the President of collar’’ employees. After the Clerk the United States on the bill (H.R. read the veto message, it was, 3329) to incorporate the youth without objection, referred to the councils on civic affairs: Committee on Post Office and Civil Service and ordered to be Without objection, the bill and message will be referred to the Committee printed. on the District of Columbia. Parliamentarian’s Note: No MR. [DURWARD G.] HALL [of Mis- member of the Committee on Post souri]: Mr. Speaker, I object. Office and Civil Service was avail- THE SPEAKER: To what does the gen- able to move that the bill and tleman object? message be referred to that com- MR. HALL: I object to the reference of mittee. The Speaker therefore or- the veto message to the committee. dered the bill referred on his own The House then adjourned with- initiative. out further action on the message. On Sept. 14, 1965,(10) the mes- Motion to Discharge sage and bill were, by unanimous consent, referred to the Com- § 21.8 A motion to discharge a mittee on the District of Columbia committee from the consider- and ordered to be printed. ation of a vetoed bill pre- sents a question of privilege, § 21.7 A veto message from the and such motion is subject to President on a bill relating a motion to table. to certain federal wages was On Sept. 7, 1965,(13) Mr. Dur- referred to the Committee on ward G. Hall, of Missouri, ad- Post Office and Civil Service. dressed the Chair: On Jan. 2, 1971,(11) the Speak- Mr. Speaker, I rise to a question of er (12) laid before the House the the highest privilege of the House, veto message of the President on based directly on the Constitution and precedents, and offer a motion. . . . 8. 111 CONG. REC. 23623, 89th Cong. Resolved, That the Committee on 1st Sess. Armed Services be discharged from further consideration of the bill H.R. 9. John W. McCormack (Mass.). 8439, for military construction, with 10. 111 CONG. REC. 23628, 89th Cong. the President’s veto thereon, and that 1st Sess. the same be now considered. 11. 116 CONG. REC. 44599, 91st Cong. 2d Sess. 13. 111 CONG. REC. 22958, 22959, 89th 12. John W. McCormack (Mass.). Cong. 1st Sess.

4946

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00174 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 21

Mr. L. Mendel Rivers, of South § 21.10 The motion to postpone Carolina, moved to lay that mo- further consideration of a tion on the table. veto message to a day certain Mr. Hall then raised a par- is privileged and takes prece- liamentary inquiry: dence over the pending ques- Is a highly privileged motion accord- tion of passing the bill noting to the Constitution subject to a mo- withstanding objections of tion to table? the President. THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE: (14) It is. On Jan. 27, 1970,(18) the Speak- (19) Motion to Postpone er pro tempore laid before the House the veto message from the § 21.9 By motion, the House President on the bill (H.R. 13111) may postpone to a day cer- making appropriations for the De- tain consideration of a Presi- partments of Labor and Health, Education, and Welfare for fiscal dential veto message trans- year 1970. He then announced mitted from the Senate. that the question before the On Apr. 29, 1959,(15) the Speak- House was ‘‘Will the House on re- er (16) laid before the House the consideration pass the bill H.R. veto message of the President of 13111, the objections of the Presi- the bill (S. 144) entitled ‘‘An Act dent to the contrary notwith- to Modify Reorganization Plan No. standing?’’ 2 of 1939 and Reorganization Plan Mr. George H. Mahon, of Texas, No. 2 of 1953,’’ along with a mes- moved that further consideration sage from the Senate that that of the veto message from the body had passed the bill over the President be postponed until the President’s veto. next day. The Speaker pro tem- Mr. John W. McCormack, of pore recognized him to proceed on Massachusetts, moved that fur- his motion. ther consideration of the Presi- § 21.11 Objection having been dent’s message be postponed until raised to a unanimous-con- the next day. The motion was agreed to.(17) 1959 (postponement for two days by unanimous consent); and 94 CONG. 14. Carl Albert (Okla.). REC. 4133, 80th Cong. 2d Sess., Apr. 15. 105 CONG. REC. 7027, 86th Cong. 1st 6, 1948 (postponement by motion for Sess. eight days). 16. Sam Rayburn (Tex.). 18. 116 CONG. REC. 1365, 91st Cong. 2d 17. See also 105 CONG. REC. 17397, Sess. 17398, 86th Cong. 1st Sess., Aug. 31, 19. Carl Albert (Okla.).

4947

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00175 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 21 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

sent request that a veto mes- Debate on Motion sage be referred to committee, further proceedings § 21.12 Debate on a motion to on the message were post- refer a vetoed bill is under poned pursuant to a previous the hour rule, and if the order of the House that the Member recognized yields matter be put over until back a part of his time with- Thursday. out moving the previous question another Member is On Tuesday, Oct. 5, 1965,(20) the recognized for an hour. Speaker pro tempore laid before the House the veto message from On Oct. 10, 1940,(1) Mr. Samuel the President on the bill (H.R. Dickstein, of New York, was rec- 5902) for the relief of Cecil ognized to move to refer to com- Graham: mittee a private bill (H.R. 7179)

THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE:(21) The and the veto message thereon. He objections of the President will be was recognized to debate his mo- spread at large upon the Journal. tion under the hour rule, and If there is no objection, the bill and after he had consumed 10 min- message will be referred to the Com- mittee on the Judiciary and ordered to utes, during which he yielded to be printed. various other Members for com- MR. [H.R.] GROSS [of Iowa]: Mr. ments and questions, he yielded Speaker, I object. back the balance of his time. The THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE: The proceedings were as follows: gentleman from Iowa objects. Under the order of the House of Oc- MR. [LEE E.] GEYER of California: tober 1, (22) this matter will be pending Will the gentleman yield? business on Thursday, October 7. MR. DICKSTEIN: I yield to the gentleman from California. 20. 111 CONG. REC. 25940, 25941, 89th MR. GEYER of California: Much has Cong. 1st Sess. been said rather impugning certain 21. Carl Albert (Okla.). things that the committee has done. It 22. On Oct. 1, 1965, the Majority Leader has been stated that the committee is asked unanimous consent that any probably too lenient. May I say that I roll call votes, other than on ques- have had bills before that committee tions of procedure, which might be involving definite hardship cases on demanded on either Tuesday or American citizens, and I think the Wednesday, Oct. 5 or 6 (which were committee is entirely too stringent. religious holidays), be put over until [Here the gavel fell.] Oct. 7. There was no objection. See 111 CONG. REC. 25796, 25797, 89th 1. 86 CONG. REC. 13523, 13524, 76th Cong. lst Sess. Cong. 3d Sess.

4948

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00176 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 22

MR. DICKSTEIN: Mr. Speaker, I ask THE SPEAKER: The gentleman will unanimous consent to proceed for 2 ad- state it. ditional minutes. MR. DICKSTEIN: The gentleman from THE SPEAKER: (2) Is there objection to Mississippi asked me to give him time, the request of the gentleman from New which I was good enough to do. I said York [Mr. Dickstein]? I would be glad to do it. Had I known There was no objection. I was going to surrender the floor by that, I would not have done it. I did MR. DICKSTEIN: Mr. Speaker, I want not surrender it. I simply yielded back to say to the membership of the House the balance of my time, and the Record that I have tried the best way I can, as will bear me out. chairman of that committee, to work THE SPEAKER: The Chair distinctly with every Member of this House. I asked the gentleman from New York if agree with my good friend from Cali- he yielded the floor, and his answer fornia that sometimes the committee is was in the affirmative. too strict, sometimes we may be a little MR. DICKSTEIN: I did not under- lenient, but on the whole I think we stand. are a strict committee. . . . May I say THE SPEAKER: The gentleman from that we should be patient and reason- Mississippi is recognized for 1 hour, if able. Let us look at it in the proper he desires that time. American light and not from any other point of view. Parliamentarian’s Note: Had Mr. Speaker, I yield back the bal- Mr. Dickstein moved the previous ance of my time. question after using his 10 min- MR. [JOHN E.] RANKIN [of Mis- utes, and if that motion had been sissippi]: Mr. Speaker, I ask for rec- agreed to, no further debate would ognition. have been in order. THE SPEAKER: The time is in control of the gentleman from New York [Mr. § 22. Consideration and Pas- Dickstein]. Has the gentleman from sage of Vetoed Bills; Voting New York [Mr. Dickstein] yielded the Under the Constitution, a ve- floor? toed bill becomes law when it is MR. DICKSTEIN: Yes. reconsidered and passed by the THE SPEAKER: The gentleman from Mississippi [Mr. Rankin] is recognized requisite two-thirds vote in each (3) for 1 hour. House. The Supreme Court has MR. DICKSTEIN: Mr. Speaker, a par- held that an affirmative vote of liamentary inquiry. two-thirds of the Members voting, THE SPEAKER: Does the gentleman a quorum being present, in each from Mississippi yield for a parliamen- House, is sufficient to override the tary inquiry? President’s veto.(4) MR. RANKIN: I yield for a parliamentary inquiry. 3. U.S. Const. art. I, § 7, clause 2. 4. Missouri Pac. Ry. Co. v Kansas, 248 2. Sam Rayburn (Tex.). U.S. 276 (1919), citing, at pp. 283,

4949

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00177 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 22 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

The vote on the question of pas- Veto Message as Unfinished sage, the objections of the Presi- Business dent to the contrary notwith- § 22.1 A veto message is the standing, must be by the yeas and unfinished business before nays under the express command the House where the consid- ( ) of the Constitution. 5 eration of the message has Consideration of a vetoed bill is been postponed from the pre- privileged,(6) and when a vetoed vious day by motion. bill is postponed to a day certain On Apr. 30, 1959,(11) the Speak- it comes up then as unfinished er (12) announced that the unfin- business.(7) ished business was the further consideration of the veto of the A vetoed bill is considered President of the bill (S. 144), to ( ) under the hour rule 8 and the modify Reorganization Plan No. 2 previous question may be moved of 1939 and Reorganization Plan at any time.(9) No. 2 of 1953. The question put was: The motion to reconsider is not in order on the question of over- Will the House, on reconsideration, pass the bill, the objections of the ( ) riding a veto. 10 President to the contrary notwithstanding? 284; see also 4 Hinds’ Precedents §§ 3537, 3538 and 7 Cannon’s Prece- § 22.2 When a veto message dents § 1111 and United States v postponed to a day certain is Ballin, 114 U.S. 1 (1892). announced as the unfinished 5. ‘‘. . . But in all such Cases [reconsid- business, no motion is re- eration of a veto] the Votes of both quired from the floor for the Houses shall be determined by Yeas consideration of such veto, and Nays, and the Names of the Per- sons voting for and against the Bill and the question ‘‘Will the shall be entered on the Journal of House, on reconsideration, each House respectively.’’ U.S. pass the bill, the objections Const. art. I, § 7, clause 2. of the President to the con- 6. U.S. Const., House Rules and Man- trary notwithstanding’’ is ual § 108 (1981); see also § 22.4, pending. infra. 7. See §§ 22.1, 22.2, infra. 11. 105 CONG. REC. 7200, 86th Cong. 1st 8. See §§ 22.7, 22.8, infra. Sess. See also 111 CONG. REC. 9. See § 22.9, infra. 26242, 89th Cong. lst Sess., Oct 7, 10. 5 Hinds’ Precedents § 5644; and 8 1965. Cannon’s Precedents § 2778. 12. Sam Rayburn (Tex.).

4950

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00178 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 22

On Apr. 14, 1948,(13) the Speak- quest the Chair had stated that the (14) question before the House was, Will er announced that the unfin- the House, on reconsideration, pass the ished business of the House was bill, the objections of the President to the further consideration of the the contrary notwithstanding? veto message of the President on The gentleman will proceed. the bill (H.R. 5052) to exclude cer- § 22.3 Where the House ad- tain vendors of newspapers or journs prior to disposition of magazines from provisions of the a veto message from the Social Security Act and the Inter- President, the bill comes up nal Revenue Code. The pro- as unfinished business on the ceedings were as follows: next legislative day. THE SPEAKER: The question is, Will On Sept. 14, 1965,(15) the the House, on reconsideration, pass the Speaker (16) announced: bill, the objections of the President to the contrary notwithstanding? . . . The unfinished business is the further consideration of the veto message The gentleman from California [Mr. from the President on the bill H.R. Gearhart] is recognized. 3329 [incorporating the Youth Councils MR. [HERMAN P.] EBERHARTER [of on Civil Affairs]. Without objection the Pennsylvania]: Mr. Speaker, will the message and the bill will be referred to gentleman yield? the Committee on the District of Co- lumbia and ordered to be printed. MR. [BERTRAND W.] GEARHART: I yield to the gentleman from Pennsyl- There was no objection. vania. The preceding day, the Presi- MR. EBERHARTER: Has the gen- dent’s veto message was laid be- tleman made a motion to call up the fore the House shortly before ad- bill? journment. Objection was made to MR. GEARHART: The Parliamentarian referral of the message and bill to advises me that is not necessary. The committee.(17) Thus, it was Speaker has already stated the issue. brought up the next day as unfin- MR. EBERHARTER: I just wanted the ished business. record to be certain. I did not hear the gentleman make a motion to call up Consideration on Calendar the bill. . . . Wednesday THE SPEAKER: The veto message was originally read on April 6, and the re- § 22.4 The consideration of a quest of the gentleman from California veto message was held to be was that it be reread for the information of the House. Previous to that re- 15. 111 CONG. REC. 23628, 89th Cong. lst Sess. 13. 94 CONG. REC. 4427, 4428, 80th 16. John W. McCormack (Mass.). Cong. 2d Sess. 17. 111 CONG. REC. 23623, 89th Cong. 14. Joseph W. Martin, Jr. (Mass.). lst Sess.

4951

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00179 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 22 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

in order on Calendar nated, a vetoed bill may be Wednesday. reported to the House with On May 11, 1932,(18) it being the recommendation that it Calendar Wednesday, the Speak- pass over the veto of the er (19) laid before the House the President. veto message of the President of On May 18, 1949,(20) Mr. Eman- the bill (H.R. 6662) to amend the uel Celler, of New York, sub- Tariff Act of 1930: mitted a privileged report from the Committee on the Judiciary MR. [WILLIAM H.] STAFFORD [of Wis- on the bill (H.R. 1036) for the re- consin]: Mr. Speaker, this being Cal- lief of R. C. Owen, R. C. Owen, endar Wednesday, ought not further Jr., and Roy Owen. The bill had business be dispensed with before we been vetoed by the President and consider any other business? referred to the Committee on the THE SPEAKER: Not necessarily. Judiciary after delivery of the MR. STAFFORD: This is Holy Wednes- day. President’s veto message in the House. The Committee on the Ju- MR. [CHARLES R.] CRISP [of Georgia]: Is there any other business under Cal- diciary then reported the bill with endar Wednesday? the recommendation that it pass over the President’s veto. The bill MR. STAFFORD: No. did so pass, two-thirds of the MR. CRISP: Mr. Speaker, to save any (21) question, I move that further business House voting in favor thereof. ( ) under Calendar Wednesday be dis- Likewise, on Aug. 5, 1940, 1 Mr. pensed with. Hatton W. Sumners, of Texas, The motion was agreed to. submitted the report from the THE SPEAKER: Let the Chair say, Committee on the Judiciary on however, in connection with this Cal- the bill (H.R. 7737) providing for endar Wednesday rule, that it does not intervention by states in certain suspend the Constitution of the United cases involving the validity of the States, which provides that a veto mes- exercise of federal power. sage of the President shall have imme- The bill had been vetoed by the diate consideration. The Clerk will President and on return to the read the message. 20. 95 CONG. REC. 6426–30, 81st Cong. Effect of Committee Report 1st Sess. 21. For an instance where vetoed bill fa- § 22.5 After referral to the vorably reported from a committee committee in which it origi- failed of passage, see 86 CONG. REC. 12615–22, 76th Cong. 3d Sess., Sept. 18. 75 CONG. REC. 10035, 72d Cong. lst 25, 1940. Sess. 1. 86 CONG. REC. 9878–84, 76th Cong. 19. John N. Garner (Tex.). 3d Sess.

4952

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00180 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 22

House referred to the Committee H.R. 3193, entitled ‘‘A bill to establish a rate of pension for aid and at- on the Judiciary. The committee tendance under part III of Veterans’ in turn reported the bill with the Regulation No. 1 (a), as amended,’’ recommendation that it pass the together with the objections of the objections of the President to the President thereto, having reconsidered said bill and the objections of contrary notwithstanding. the President thereto, reports the The House voted to override the same back to the House with the unanimous recommendation that President’s veto, with 253 yeas said bill do pass, the objections of and 46 nays. the President to the contrary notwithstanding. . . . Committee Report as Privi- MR. RANKIN: Mr. Speaker, I ask for leged recognition. THE SPEAKER: (3) The gentleman § 22.6 Parliamentarian’s Note: from Mississippi is recognized. Reports from committees to MR. RANKIN: Mr. Speaker, I ask which vetoed bills are re- unanimous consent to extend my referred, recommending pas- marks at this point and include letters sage of such bills over a veto, which I have received . . . supporting this measure and urging the Congress are privileged. to override the veto. . . . On Aug. 17, 1951,(2) Mr. John Mr. Speaker, I move the previous E. Rankin, of Mississippi, sub- question. mitted a privileged report from The previous question was ordered. the Committee on Veterans’ Af- THE SPEAKER: The question is, Will fairs on the bill (H.R. 3193), to es- the House, on reconsideration, pass the bill, the objections of the President to tablish a pension rate, with the the contrary notwithstanding? recommendation that such bill Under the Constitution, this vote pass over the President’s veto. must be determined by the yeas and The proceedings were as follows: nays. MR. RANKIN: Mr. Speaker, I submit Those in favor of passing the bill, the a privileged report from the Committee objections of the President to the con- on Veterans’ Affairs on the bill (H.R. trary notwithstanding, will, when their 3193) to establish a rate of pension for names are called, vote ’aye,’ those op- aid and attendance under part III of posed ‘‘no.’’ Veterans’ Regulation No. 1 (a), as The Clerk will call the roll. amended. The question was taken; and there The Clerk read as follows: were yeas 318, nays 45, not voting 69. Your Committee on Veterans’ Af- . . . fairs, to whom was referred the bill, So, two-thirds having voted in favor thereof, the bill was passed, the objec- 2. 97 CONG. REC. 10197, 10202, 82d Cong. 1st Sess. 3. Sam Rayburn (Tex.).

4953

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00181 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 22 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

tions of the President to the contrary who may in turn control the notwithstanding. allocation of that time to other Members. Debate On Apr. 10, 1973,(6) the House § 22.7 Debate on the question considered the question of over- of passing a bill over the riding the President’s veto on the President’s veto is under the bill (H.R. 3298), to restore certain hour rule and the Member in water and sewer grant programs. charge may yield to others Mr. William R. Poage, of Texas, for debate in his hour. was recognized for one hour. The On May 17, 1951,(4) the Speak- proceedings were as follows: ( ) er 5 called up as unfinished busi- THE SPEAKER: (7) The gentleman ness for further consideration a from Texas (Mr. Poage) is recognized veto message from the President for 1 hour. on a bill (H.R. 3096) relating to MR. POAGE: Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 the acquisition and disposition of minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Oklahoma, the Speaker of land by the armed forces. Mr. the House of Representatives. Carl Vinson, of Georgia, was rec- MR. ALBERT: Mr. Speaker, I appre- ognized by the Chair. Mr. Vinson ciate the fact that the distinguished raised a parliamentary inquiry: chairman of the Committee on Agri- Mr. Speaker, do I understand cor- culture, the gentleman from Texas rectly that under the rules of the (Mr. Poage), has yielded to me. I ap- House I am entitled to 1 hour, during preciate the years that I served under which time I can yield to other Mem- his leadership on that committee. bers without, however, yielding the In a few minutes, as every Member floor? of this House knows, we will cast one THE SPEAKER: The gentleman is cor- of the critical votes of this session of rect. Congress—critical because of the importance of the subject matter with § 22.8 A Member recognized on which we are dealing, and critical be- the question of passage of a cause of the challenge which we con- bill over the President’s veto front as a law-making body of the Na- tion. . . . controls one hour of debate, MR. POAGE: Mr. Speaker, it is my and he may yield a portion of desire to yield half of this time to the that time to another Member gentleman from California (Mr. Teague). I understand that I can only 4. 97 CONG. REC. 5435, 82d Cong. 1st Sess. See also 116 CONG. REC. 750, 6. 119 CONG. REC. 11679–91, 93d Cong. 91st Cong. 2d Sess., Jan. 22, 1970. 1st Sess. 5. Sam Rayburn (Tex.). 7. Carl Albert (Okla.).

4954

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00182 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 22

yield to him one time. Is it in order for attempt in this situation to separate me at this time to yield him 30 min- rhetoric from the facts and I want to utes and let him apportion it? allude now to some of the facts. . . . THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE: (8) The MR. POAGE: Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 gentleman has control of the time. He minutes to the distinguished majority can yield his time. leader, the gentleman from Massachu- MR. POAGE: I yield to the gentleman setts (Mr. O’Neill). from California 30 minutes. MR. [THOMAS P.] O’NEILL [Jr.]: Mr. MR. [CHARLES M.] TEAGUE of Cali- Speaker, I am speaking today as a fornia: Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary window box farmer, as I was referred inquiry. to by a gentleman from the minority side the other day, but I want to re- THE SPEAKER: The gentleman will state it. mind my colleagues that this program, very interestingly, passed the House by MR. TEAGUE of California: Does that 297 votes to 54 votes. And it passed mean that I must use all of my 30 the House because the rural water pro- minutes together? gram is crucial for pollution control THE SPEAKER: The gentleman may and health in rural America. . . . use his time as he sees fit, for purposes MR. TEAGUE of California: Mr. of debate only. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gen- MR. TEAGUE of California: I thank tleman from Kansas (Mr. Sebelius). the Speaker. MR. [KEITH G.] SEBELIUS: Mr. I yield myself 3 minutes. Speaker, I appreciate this opportunity Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the to discuss the Presidential veto of H.R. President’s veto of H.R. 3298. 3298, legislation to restore the rural It is not easy for me, and I know it water and waste disposal grant pro- is not easy for a great many of Mem- gram. bers of the House, to vote to sustain I share the conviction that we must the veto on this bill. I say that because restore commonsense to our Federal the program that has been affected by spending and hold Federal outlays to the President’s action is not, in my the ceiling level of $250 billion. How- opinion, a bad program—it is in fact ever, how we ‘‘spend’’ this limited the best of the several agricultural pro- budget is debatable. It is a matter of grams for which the President has im- priorities. . . . pounded funds. . . . MR. POAGE: Mr. Speaker, I yield my- THE SPEAKER: Does the gentleman self my remaining time. from California desire to yield further Mr. Speaker, there are two issues in- at this time. volved in our consideration of the MR. TEAGUE of California: Mr. President’s veto. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gen- The first is the issue of the constitu- tleman from Ohio [Mr. Harsha]. tional division of powers under our tri- MR. [WILLIAM H.] HARSHA: Mr. partite form of Government. Can any Speaker, I believe we should make an President unappropriate funds—the appropriation of which he has pre- 8. John J. McFall (Calif.). viously approved? . . .

4955

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00183 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 22 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

Mr. Speaker, I move the previous Voting by Yeas and Nays question. Two-thirds not having voted in § 22.10 Under the Constitution, favor of the override, the veto of the vote on passage of a bill the President was sustained and over the President’s veto the bill was rejected. must be by the yeas and nays. Effect of Moving the Previous On May 17, 1951,(11) the House Question had under consideration the question of overriding the President’s § 22.9 The demand for the pre- veto on a bill (H.R. 3096), relating vious question precludes fur- to the acquisition and disposition ther debate on the question of land by the armed forces. Mr. of passing a bill over a Presi- Carl Vinson, of Georgia, moved dential veto. the previous question. The (12) On June 16, 1948,(9) the House Chair declared that under the had under consideration the veto Constitution, the question would message of the President on a bill have to be determined by the yeas (13) (H.R. 6355) making supplemental and nays. appropriations for the Federal Se- Vote Recapitulations and curity Agency. Mr. Frank B. Changes Keefe, of Wisconsin, was recognized to control the debate for one § 22.11 Where a yea and nay hour. After brief remarks, he im- vote has been announced mediately moved the previous and a recapitulation is or- question. Mr. John J. Rooney, of dered on the question of New York, then raised a par- overriding a Presidential liamentary inquiry: veto, a Member may correct Mr. Speaker, under the rules is not his vote only and may not the majority granted the privilege of change it; and corrections in discussing this message? a vote on recapitulation are THE SPEAKER: (10) If the gentleman made after the yeas have from Wisconsin withdraws his moving of the previous question it would be in 11. 97 CONG. REC. 5444, 82d Cong. 1st order. Otherwise it is not in order. Sess. 12. Sam Rayburn (Tex.). 9. 94 CONG. REC. 8473, 80th Cong. 2d 13. U.S. Const. art. I, § 7. See also 97 Sess. CONG. REC. 13745, 82d Cong. 1st 10. Joseph W. Martin, Jr. (Mass.). Sess., Oct. 20, 1951.

4956

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00184 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 22

been read by the Clerk and Parliamentarian’s Note: Since then after the nays are read. the vote on overriding a veto is On June 17, 1947,(14) the House now taken by the electronic voting considered the question of over- device, a recapitulation is not in riding the President’s veto on a order. The Speaker could, of bill (H.R. 1), to reduce individual course, order the vote taken by income tax payments. After de- the call of the roll if circumstances bate a roll call vote was taken warranted. pursuant to the constitutional requirement. Mr. Charles A. Pairing of Votes Halleck, of Indiana, sought a recapitulation of the vote, and the § 22.12 Pairs on the question of Chair ordered the recapitulation. passage of a bill over a Presi- dential veto are recorded in Mr. Adolph J. Sabath, of Illi- the Congressional Record nois, raised a parliamentary inquiry: and are arranged in a two to one ratio. Mr. Speaker, a Member having voted (16) one way or the other cannot change his On Aug. 5, 1940, after a roll vote on the capitulation? call vote which sustained the veto THE SPEAKER: (15) A Member may of the President of a bill (H.R. correct his vote, but cannot change it. 3233) to repeal certain acts of The Clerk will call the names of Congress, the Clerk announced those voting ‘‘yea.’’ the pairing of certain Members on The Clerk called the names of those voting ‘‘yea.’’ the vote. The Congressional THE SPEAKER: Are there any correc- Record disclosed the pairs, as fol- tions to be made where any Member lows: was listening and heard his name called as voting ‘‘yea’’ who did not vote Mr. McDowell and Mr. Ball (to over- ‘‘yea?’’ . . . The Chair hears none. ride with Mr. Schwert (to sustain). The Clerk will call the names of Mr. Wolfenden of Pennsylvania and those voting ‘‘nay.’’ Mr. Osmers (to override) with Mr. The Clerk called the names of those Cullen (to sustain). voting ‘‘nay.’’ Mr. Culkin and Mr. Jennings (to THE SPEAKER: Is there any Member override) with Mr. Hook (to sustain). voting ‘‘nay’’ who is incorrectly re- Mr. Kilburn and Mr. Reece of Ten- corded? . . . The Chair hears none. nessee (to override) with Mr. Buckley of New York (to sustain). 14. 93 CONG. REC. 7143, 7144, 80th Cong. 1st Sess. 16. 86 CONG. REC. 9889, 9890, 76th 15. Joseph W. Martin, Jr. (Mass.). Cong. 3d Sess.

4957

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00185 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 23 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

§ 23. Disposition of Vetoed dent’s veto of the bill (H.R. 13111) Bills After Reconsider- making appropriations for the De- ation partments of Labor and Health, Education, and Welfare for fiscal When a vetoed House bill is re- year 1970. The President’s veto considered and passed in the was sustained, two-thirds not hav- House, the House sends the bill ing voted in favor of overriding it. ( ) and veto message to the Senate The Speaker 3 then announced: and informs that body that it The message and the bill are repassed by the constitutional two- ferred to the Committee on Appropria- thirds vote.(17) When the House tions. fails to pass a bill over the Presi- The Clerk will notify the Senate of dent’s veto, the bill and veto mes- the action of the House. sage are referred to committee, Note: the form of message sent and the Senate is informed of the to the Senate in this situation is action of the House.(18) as follows: A bill enacted over a Presi- ‘‘The House of Representatives dential veto is sent by the Pre- having proceeded to reconsider siding Officer of the House which the bill (H.R. ll) entitled . . . last considered it to the Adminis- returned by the President of the trator of General Services who re- United States with his objections, ceives it for deposit.(1) to the House of Representatives, in which it originated, it was Re- Referral to Committee solved, that the said bill do not pass, two-thirds of the House of § 23.1 Where the House fails to Representatives not agreeing to override the President’s veto, pass the same.’’ the veto message and the bill Similarly, on June 11, 1946,(4) are referred to the com- the Speaker,(5) laid before the mittee which originally re- House the veto message of the ported the bill. President of the bill (H.R. 4908) to On Jan. 28, 1970,(2) the House provide additional facilities for the considered overriding the Presi- also 89 CONG. REC. 7051–55, 78th 17. See § 23.2, infra. Cong. 1st Sess., July 2, 1943. 18. See § 23.1, infra. 3. John W. McCormack (Mass.). 1. 1 USC § 106a (1970 ed.). 4. 92 CONG. REC. 6774–78, 79th Cong. 2. 116 CONG. REC. 1552, 1553, 91st 2d Sess. Cong. 2d Sess., Jan. 28, 1970. See 5. Sam Rayburn (Tex.).

4958

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00186 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 24

mediation of labor disputes. The REPRESENTATIVES, U.S., House sustained the President’s April 2, 1948. veto and the Speaker ordered the The House of Representatives having bill and accompanying papers re- proceeded to reconsider the bill (H.R. ferred to the Committee on Labor. 4790) entitled ‘‘An act to reduce individual income-tax payments, and for § 23.2 By message the House other purposes,’’ returned by the Presi- informed the Senate of the dent of the United States with his ob- passage of a bill in the House jections, to the House of Representa- to reduce income taxes over tives, in which it originated; it was the President’s veto. ‘‘Resolved, That the said bill pass, On Apr. 2, 1948,(6) the following two-thirds of the House of Representa- message from the House of Rep- tives agreeing to pass the same.’’ resentatives was laid before the Attest: Senate: JOHN ANDREWS, IN THE HOUSE OF Clerk.

D. VACATING LEGISLATIVE ACTIONS § 24. Procedure dent to the passage of a bill (8) the Committee of the Whole and the Passage of Bills House by separate vote had agreed to a two-page amendment, the second page of which erro- § 24.1 By unanimous consent, neously had not been read by the the proceedings whereby a Clerk. Mr. Wilbur D. Mills, of Ar- kansas, asked unanimous consent bill had been passed were va- that the proceedings whereby the cated, so that an error in an bill had been passed be vacated amendment to the bill could and that an amendment to the bill be corrected. be agreed to. On Feb. 12, 1951,(7) it was an- There was no objection. nounced to the House that during Thereupon, the Speaker (9) an- a previous day’s proceedings inci- nounced that without objection

6. 94 CONG. REC. 4018, 80th Cong. 2d 8. H.R. 1612, to extend the authority of Sess. the President to enter into trade agreements under § 310 of the Tariff 7. 97 CONG. REC. 1233, 1234, 82d Cong. Act of 1930. 1st Sess. 9. Sam Rayburn (Tex.).

4959

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00187 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 24 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

the proceedings whereby the bill Without objection, the action taken had been passed would be va- on the question of the passage of the bill will be vacated. cated, the amendment read by Mr. There was no objection. Mills agreed to, the bill be considered as engrossed, read a third Thereupon, a motion to recom- time and passed, and that a mo- mit the bill was offered by Mr. tion to reconsider be laid on the Silvio O. Conte, of Massachusetts. table. The motion was rejected. There was no objection. § 24.3 In the situation where the House and Senate have § 24.2 By unanimous consent, passed similar bills, an ac- the House may vacate the tion sometimes taken by the proceedings whereby a bill House is to amend the Sen- was passed so that the Chair ate bill to conform to the can entertain a motion to re- provisions of the House bill, commit. and then to vacate, by unani- ( ) On Mar. 23, 1970, 10 imme- mous consent, those pro- diately after a voice vote by the ceedings whereby the House House whereby a bill (11) was bill was passed. passed, the following proceedings occurred: On May 18, 1961,(13) Mr. Oren Harris, of Arkansas, asked unani- PARLIAMENTARY INQUIRY mous consent for the immediate (14) MR. [DONALD M.] FRASER [of Min- consideration of a Senate bill nesota]: Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary and then moved to strike out of inquiry. all its provisions after the enact- THE SPEAKER: (12) The gentleman will ing clause, and to insert the provi- state it. sions of a previously passed House MR. FRASER: I was on my feet seek- bill (15) in lieu thereof. There being ing recognition for the purpose of making a motion to recommit at the time no objection, both the bill and an the Speaker was beginning to move to amendment subsequently offered the point of putting the question. by Mr. Harris were read to the THE SPEAKER: The Chair wants to be House. absolutely fair. The Chair believes the The amendment was agreed to. Members know that. 13. 107 CONG. REC. 8367, 8368, 87th 10. 116 CONG. REC. 8568, 91st Cong. 2d Cong. 1st Sess. Sess. 14. S. 610, providing for the establish- 11. H.R. 15728, to authorize the exten- ment of a U.S. Travel Service within sion of certain naval vessel loans and the Department of Commerce and a for other purposes. Travel Advisory Board. 12. John W. McCormack (Mass.). 15. H.R. 4614.

4960

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00188 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 24

The Senate bill was ordered to found that it contained a tax pro- be read a third time, was read the vision and therefore could not third time, and passed. under the Constitution originate By unanimous consent the pro- in the Senate. After vacating the ceedings by which the House bill House passage of the Senate bill, (H.R. 4614) was passed were va- the House passed its own bill cated, and that bill was laid on (H.R. 17138) and sent it to the the table. Senate. § 24.4 By unanimous consent, Tabling of Bills the proceedings whereby a Senate bill had been consid- § 24.5 By unanimous consent, ered in the House, amended proceedings whereby a (to include the provisions of House bill had been laid on a similar House-passed bill), the table were vacated and and passed, were vacated, the bill was again consid- and the bill was indefinitely ered, amended, and passed. postponed. On May 4, 1959,(18) Mr. Oren On May 12, 1970,(16) Mr. Don Harris, of Arkansas, asked unani- Fuqua, of Florida, asked unanimous consent that the proceedings (19) mous consent that the proceedings whereby a bill was laid on the whereby the House considered, table be vacated for the purpose of amended, and passed a bill of the offering an amendment. There Senate (17) be vacated and that was no objection. Thereupon, Mr. further proceedings on that bill be Harris moved to strike out all indefinitely postponed. There was after the enacting clause and in- no objection. sert in lieu thereof an amendment Parliamentarian’s Note: After which he sent to the Clerk’s desk. passage of the Senate bill it was The amendment was read to the House, whereupon the following 16. 116 CONG. REC. 15150, 91st Cong. 2d proceedings took place: Sess.; see also 116 CONG. REC. MR. HARRIS: Mr. Speaker, for the in- 14951–60, 91st Cong. 2d Sess., May formation of the Members of the 11, 1970, for proceedings incident to the passage of the bill. For a further 18. 105 CONG. REC. 7310–13, 86th Cong. example see 108 CONG. REC. 18300, 1st Sess. 18301, 87th Cong. 2d Sess., Aug. 31, 19. H.R. 5610, to amend the Railroad 1962; and 105 CONG. REC. 7313, 86th Cong. 1st Sess., May 4, 1959. Retirement Act of 1937, the Railroad 17. S. 2694, to amend the District of Co- Retirement Tax Act, and the Rail- lumbia Police and Firemen’s Salary road Unemployment Insurance Act, Act of 1958 and the District of Co- so as to provide increases in benefits lumbia Teacher’s Salary Act of 1955. and for other purposes.

4961

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00189 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 24 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

House, I have asked unanimous con- The amendment was agreed to. sent that the proceedings whereby the THE SPEAKER: The question is on the bill H.R. 5610 was laid on the table, engrossment and third reading of the the amendment agreed to, the bill en- bill. grossed and read a third time and The bill was ordered to be engrossed passed, be vacated, for the purpose of and read a third time, and was read offering an amendment. the third time. The unanimous-consent request was THE SPEAKER: The question is on the agreed to, and I have offered an passage of the bill. amendment, which has just been read. The bill was passed. The amendment to the bill H.R. 5610 A motion to reconsider was laid on which I have just offered strikes out all the table. after the enacting clause and inserts MR. HARRIS: Mr. Speaker, I ask the provisions of the bill that passed unanimous consent that the pro- the Senate last week. . . . ceedings whereby S. 226, an act to The necessity for this action is that amend the Railroad Retirement Act of last week after the House had taken 1937, the Railroad Retirement Tax Act, the action it did, we, as usual, when and the Railroad Unemployment In- we have a bill from the other body on surance Act, so as to provide increases the same subject on the Speaker’s in benefits, and for other purposes, as table, asked that that bill be taken amended, was read a third time, and from the Speaker’s desk, that all after passed, be vacated, and the bill be in- the enacting clause be stricken out, definitely postponed. and that the House-passed bill be in- THE SPEAKER: Is there objection to serted. That was the usual procedure the request of the gentleman from Ar- we followed, and I made the request kansas? after the House had taken its action There was no objection. last week. It later developed that that was not the correct action that should Parliamentarian’s Note: There have been taken because there are tax is no motion in the House to take provisions in this legislation. The Con- a measure from the table. A unan- stitution provides, as you know, that all legislation relating directly to tax imous-consent request to vacate measures, revenues, must originate in proceedings whereby a measure the House of Representatives. There- was laid on the table is the avail- fore, this action to vacate that pro- able procedure. ceeding is in order to comply with the constitutional provision by passing this Order That Bill Be Reported legislation in order to accomplish what the House intended last week after it § 24.6 By unanimous consent, considered this matter rather exten- the House vacated pro- sively. . . . THE SPEAKER [Sam Rayburn, of ceedings whereby a com- Texas]: The question is on the amend- mittee had ordered a bill re- ment. ported to the House, prior to 4962

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00190 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 24

actual reporting of the bill, mittee of the Whole, whereby so that the committee could an amendment to a bill had consider proposed amend- been adopted, were vacated, ments thereto. and the Chair again asked if On Dec. 5, 1944,(20) Mr. any Member desired to de- Schuyler Otis Bland, of Virginia, bate it. asked unanimous consent that the On Mar. 27, 1947,(2) after the proceedings in the Committee on adoption by the Committee of the Merchant Marine and Fisheries Whole of an amendment to a by which a bill (H.R. 5387) was pending bill,(3) Mr. John W. ordered to be reported to the McCormack, of Massachusetts, House be vacated, for the purpose asked unanimous consent that the of considering proposed amend- proceedings by which the amendments. The following exchange ment had been adopted be va- took place: cated. There was no objection to MR. [JOSEPH W.] MARTIN of Massa- the gentleman’s request. There- chusetts: Mr. Speaker, reserving the (4) right to object, what is the request of upon, the Chairman invited any the gentleman? Member, who so desired, to speak MR. BLAND: It is a bill amending sec- on the amendment. Some debate tion 101(a) of the Merchant Marine Act ensued, at the conclusion of of 1936. The purpose is to vacate cer- which, the amendment was tain proceedings of the committee, which ordered the bill reported. agreed to. THE SPEAKER: (1) As the Chair understands, the committee ordered the bill Agreements to Simple Resolu- reported, but it has not yet been re- tions ported, and the gentleman from Vir- ginia desires it to go back to the com- § 24.8 At the request of the Mi- mittee for further consideration by the nority Leader, by unanimous committee. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Virginia? consent, the House agreed to There was no objection. vacate the proceedings whereby it had agreed to a Adoption of Amendments resolution electing minority members to committees of § 24.7 By unanimous consent, proceedings in the Com- 2. 93 CONG. REC. 2773, 80th Cong. 1st Sess. 20. 90 CONG. REC. 8863, 78th Cong. 2d 3. H.R. 1, to reduce individual income Sess. tax payments. 1. Sam Rayburn (Tex.). 4. Francis H. Case (S.D.).

4963

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00191 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 24 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

the House, then reconsidered a resolution, reconsidered the resolution and agreed to the resolution, and then it with an amendment chang- again agreed to the resolu- ing the order of names (and tion with a corrective thus the seniority on a com- amendment. mittee) in the resolution. On Feb. 3, 1969,(8) Mr. Carl Al- On Feb. 3, 1969,(5) the following bert, of Oklahoma, asked unani- proceedings occurred in the mous consent to vacate the pro- House: ceedings whereby the House (9) MR. GERALD R. FORD [of Michigan]: agreed to a resolution and Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent asked for its immediate reconsid- to vacate the proceedings whereby the eration with an amendment which House agreed to House Resolution he sent to the desk. There was no (6) 176 on January 29, and ask for its objection to the gentleman’s re- immediate consideration with an amendment which I send to the desk. quest. Thereupon, both the resolu- THE SPEAKER: (7) Is there objection to tion and the amendment offered the request of the gentleman from by Mr. Albert were read to the Michigan? House. The amendment and the There was no objection. resolution as amended were A reading of both the resolution agreed to. and the amendment offered by Mr. Ford ensued, at the conclu- Agreement to Concurrent Reso- sion of which the amendment and lution the resolution as amended were § 24.10 By unanimous consent, agreed to. A motion to reconsider the House vacated the pro- was laid on the table. ceedings whereby it had § 24.9 By unanimous consent, agreed to a concurrent reso- the House vacated the pro- lution with an amendment, ceedings whereby it had again considered the resolu- agreed, on a previous day, to tion, and agreed to it without an amendment. 5. 115 CONG. REC. 2433, 91st Cong. 1st Sess. 8. 115 CONG. REC. 2433, 91st Cong. 1st 6. H. Res. 176, establishing the order of Sess. names on a resolution electing Mem- 9. H. Res. 177, correcting the name of bers to various committees of the the Resident Commissioner to cor- House. respond with that on the Clerk’s offi- 7. John W. McCormack (Mass.). cial roll.

4964

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00192 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 24

On June 22, 1965,(10) Mr. Dante sion of which the joint resolution B. Fascell, of Florida, asked unan- was ordered to be engrossed and imous consent that the pro- read a third time, was read the ceedings whereby a Senate con- third time, and passed, and a mo- ( ) current resolution 11 was amend- tion to reconsider was laid on the ed and agreed to be vacated and table. that the resolution be considered Thereafter, Mr. Staggers, who as agreed to without amendment. There being no objection, it was so had been recognized to continue ordered. his remarks after passage, yielded for a parliamentary inquiry:

Passage of Joint Resolution MR. [SAMUEL L.] DEVINE [of Ohio]: Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary inquiry. § 24.11 A motion to take a mat- THE SPEAKER: (14) The gentleman will ter from the table is not in state it. order in the House; and MR. DEVINE: It was the under- when a joint resolution has standing of the minority, and I think of been engrossed, read a third a majority of the people on the floor of the House, that when the gentleman time and passed, and the mo- from West Virginia made his unani- tion to reconsider laid on the mous-consent request that this bill be table, the matter can be re- brought up, the question was whether opened only by a unanimous- or not it could be brought up for imme- consent request that the pro- diate consideration without objection. There was no objection, but I am not ceedings be vacated. sure whether I heard the Speaker cor- On Feb. 8, 1973,(12) Mr. Harley rectly. The Speaker said that it was O. Staggers, of West Virginia, engrossed and read a third time and asked for and was granted unani- passed. mous consent for the immediate THE SPEAKER: The gentleman is cor- consideration of a joint resolu- rect. The Chair had no knowledge of tion.(13) any other procedure. The only procedure the Chair had in his knowledge A reading of the resolution to was it was going to be called up by a the House ensued, at the conclu- unanimous-consent request. Then the Chair said, ‘‘without objection, the bill 10. 111 CONG. REC. 14425, 89th Cong. is engrossed, read a third time, and 1st Sess. passed.’’ Any Member during that en- 11. S. Con. Res. 36, relating to the 20th tire procedure could have objected if he anniversary of the United Nations. desired to do so. 12. 119 CONG. REC. 3929, 3930, 93d MR. DEVINE: Is the gentleman from Cong. 1st Sess. West Virginia now making a statement 13. H.J. Res. 331, to extend the Railway Labor Act. 14. Carl Albert (Okla.).

4965

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00193 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 Ch. 24 § 24 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS

after the fact, or is this in support of Is there objection to the request of the bill already passed? the gentleman from Ohio? THE SPEAKER: The gentleman . . . is There was no objection. Subse- doing what is often done on a unanimous-consent bill, and that is explain quently, the request for the imme- the bill to the House after passage. diate consideration of the House MR. STAGGERS: Mr. Speaker, I ask joint resolution was withdrawn. for 5 minutes to explain and say to the Thereupon, without objection, gentleman from Ohio that I did not in- Senate Joint Resolution 59, which tend for this to be in this fashion; that I thought I would ask for unanimous had been delivered to the House consent to bring it to the floor, and during discussion of House Joint that was my intent. The Speaker did Resolution 331, and which also make a statement that the bill was en- dealt with the Railway Labor Act, grossed, read a third time, and passed. and differed little from the House MR. DEVINE: Mr. Speaker, a further parliamentary inquiry. joint resolution, was brought be- THE SPEAKER: The gentleman will fore the House for immediate con- state it. sideration. After Senate Joint Res- MR. DEVINE: In view of the state- olution 59 had been read, Mr. ment made by the chairman of the Staggers explained the points committee that he had no intention wherein it differed from the that it be brought up under that set of circumstances, and the fact that the House joint resolution earlier con- Chair has stated that a motion to re- sidered, and offered an amend- consider has been laid on the table, I ment to the Senate joint resolu- would ask the Speaker if a motion tion. The amendment was agreed would not be in order to remove from to. Senate Joint Resolution 59 was the table the motion for reconsideration. then ordered read a third time, THE SPEAKER: It takes unanimous was read the third time, and consent to vacate the proceedings by passed, and a motion to reconsider which a motion to reconsider was laid laid on the table.(15) on the table. MR. DEVINE: Mr. Speaker, I ask, Postponement of Joint Resolu- therefore, unanimous consent to vacate tion the order of the Chair in connection with this legislation. § 24.12 By unanimous consent, THE SPEAKER: The gentleman from Ohio has asked unanimous consent the proceedings whereby a that the proceedings by which the joint joint resolution had been in- resolution was engrossed, read a third definitely postponed were time, and passed, and the motion to reconsider laid upon the table, be va- 15. 119 CONG. REC. 3933–35, 93d Cong. cated. 1st Sess., Feb. 8, 1973.

4966

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00194 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02 BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, PETITIONS, AND MEMORIALS Ch. 24 § 24

vacated and the resolution THE SPEAKER: (18) Is there objection? restored to the Consent Cal- There was no objection. endar. Subsequently, on Feb. 17, On Jan. 6, 1936,(16) the Clerk 1936,(19) after the Clerk’s call of called Senate Joint Resolution Senate Joint Resolution 118, the 118, providing for the filling of a following proceedings occurred: vacancy on the Board of Regents of the Smithsonian Institution of THE SPEAKER: Is there objection (to the class other than Members of the consideration of the resolution)? Congress. By unanimous consent, MR. [JESSE P.] WOLCOTT [of Michi- the Senate joint resolution was in- gan]: Reserving the right to object, this definitely postponed. is the first time this has been on the On Feb. 3, 1936,(17) Mr. Kent E. Consent Calendar. This is numbered Keller, of Illinois, the same Mem- 375. I would like to ask the Chair how it got on the calendar? ber who had requested that the Senate joint resolution be post- THE SPEAKER: The Chair is informed poned indefinitely on Jan. 6, 1936, that this joint resolution was indefinitely postponed and later the gen- requested unanimous consent that tleman from Illinois (Mr. Keller) asked those proceedings be vacated: unanimous consent that the pro- MR. KELLER: Mr. Speaker, I ask ceedings be vacated and the joint reso- unanimous consent to vacate the pro- lution restored to the calendar. That ceedings by which Senate Joint Resolu- request was granted and the joint reso- tion 118, providing for the appointment lution was restored to the calendar by of Mr. Morris, a member of the Board of Regents was indefinitely postponed, the order of the House. and reinstate the same on the cal- Is there objection to the consider- endar. ation of the joint resolution? There was no objection. 16. 80 CONG. REC. 112, 74th Cong. 2d Sess. 18. Joseph W. Byrns (Tenn.). 17. 80 CONG. REC. 1381, 74th Cong. 2d 19. 80 CONG. REC. 2224, 74th Cong. 2d Sess. Sess.

4967

VerDate 18-JUN-99 15:18 Aug 25, 1999 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00195 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 E:\RENEE\52093C24.TXT txed02 PsN: txed02