THE HOUSE RULES, JOURNAL, AND RECORD Ch. 5 § 6 The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the motion. The Clerk read as follows: Ms. Norton moves to refer the resolution to a select committee of five members, to be appointed by the Speaker, not more than three of whom shall be from the same political party, with instructions not to report back the same until it has conducted a full and complete study of, and made a determination on, whether there is any reason to deny Delegates voting rights in the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union in light of the decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia in Michel v. Anderson (14 F.3d 623 (D.C. Cir. 1994)) upholding the constitutionality of these voting rights, and the inclusion of such voting rights in the Rules for the 103rd, 110th and 111th Congresses. MOTION TO TABLE Mr. CANTOR. Mr. Speaker, I have a motion to table at the desk. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the motion. The Clerk read as follows: Mr. Cantor moves to lay on the table the motion. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion to table. The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that the ayes ap- peared to have it. Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays. The yeas and nays were ordered. The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were—yeas 224, nays 187, not vot- ing 21, as follows: [Roll No. 3]... § 6. Amending the Standing Rules As noted earlier, the House adopts a set of rules on opening day of a new Congress, and those rules remain applicable for the duration of that Con- gress. However, the House may amend those standing rules at any point, and the rules in their amended form will govern from the point at which the amendments are adopted.(1) In the 106th Congress, the standing rules of the House were recodified in order to present a more logical organization by grouping together related rules, standardizing language across rules, eliminating obsolete provisions, and renumbering rules accordingly.(2) The recodification was not intended to effect any substantive amendment to the standing rules, and the rules in their revised format were adopted prior to the consideration of substantive amendments thereto.(3) 1. In rare instances, the House has adopted changes to the standing rules on a contingent basis or with a delayed effective date. See §§ 6.16, 6.17, infra. 2. 145 CONG. REC. 47–223, 106th Cong. 1st Sess. (Jan. 6, 1999). 3. Id. 49 VerDate Nov 24 2008 15:53 Dec 04, 2019 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 F:\PRECEDIT\WORKING\2019VOL02\2019VOL02.PAGETURN.V6.TXT 4473-B Ch. 5 § 6 PRECEDENTS OF THE HOUSE Amendments to the standing rules of the House have been considered by a variety of methods. The Committee on Rules has jurisdiction over the rules of the House,(4) and proposals to amend the standing rules emanating from the committee are accorded privileged status.(5) The Committee on Rules is required to provide a comparative print (‘‘Ramseyer’’) of the pro- posed amendment, showing how the current rules would be changed by the amendment.(6) When a proposal to amend the House rules is under debate, the Chair will not attempt to interpret the content of the proposed changes in response to a parliamentary inquiry,(7) but may explain the application of the procedural status quo to the instant proceedings.(8) The House has, by unanimous consent, re–referred a proposal to amend the House rules back to the Committee on Rules after it had been called up for consider- ation.(9) The Committee on Rules may also provide a special order of business res- olution to structure debate on a proposed amendment to the House rules.(10) The resolution adopting the standing rules may itself contain a separate order (in the form of a special order of business) providing for the consider- ation of a specified amendment to those rules(11) (whereby the issue of the amendment could be isolated for a separate vote on its provisions only).(12) A special order of business resolution providing for the consideration of an ordinary legislative measure may also (in a separate section of the resolu- tion) effect a change in House rules.(13) A resolution to amend the standing rules, though privileged, has also been offered in the House by unanimous consent.(14) The House has also considered such resolutions by suspension of the rules(15) and by discharge 4. Rule X, clause 1(o)(1), House Rules and Manual § 733 (2019). 5. Rule XIII, clause 5(a)(4), House Rules and Manual § 853 (2019). For an example of a resolution proposing to amend the standing rules being called up as a privileged mat- ter, see § 6.1, infra. See also Deschler’s Precedents Ch. 5 §§ 5.1, 5.3. For procedures for amending such resolutions when they are called up, see Deschler’s Precedents Ch. 5 §§ 5.7, 5.8. 6. Rule XIII, clause 3(g), House Rules and Manual § 848 (2019). For an earlier ruling made before this requirement was applied to changes in House rules, see Deschler’s Precedents Ch. 5 § 5.5. 7. See Deschler’s Precedents Ch. 5 § 5.12. 8. See § 6.8, infra. 9. See Deschler’s Precedents Ch. 5 § 5.9. 10. See § 6.2, infra. 11. See § 6.4, infra. 12. See § 6.5, infra. 13. See § 6.10, infra. 14. See § 6.7, infra. See also Deschler’s Precedents Ch. 5 § 5.2. 15. See § 6.8, infra. 50 VerDate Nov 24 2008 15:53 Dec 04, 2019 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 F:\PRECEDIT\WORKING\2019VOL02\2019VOL02.PAGETURN.V6.TXT 4473-B THE HOUSE RULES, JOURNAL, AND RECORD Ch. 5 § 6 petition procedures.(16) Amendments to the standing rules have been consid- ered in the House, the Committee of the Whole,(17) and the House ‘‘as in’’ Committee of the Whole.(18) The question of consideration has been applied to a resolution proposing to amend the standing rules.(19) As noted, the Committee on Rules has jurisdiction over amendments to House rules. However, rule XXIII (known as the ‘‘Code of Official Conduct’’) involves rules relating to House ethics requirements, and as such falls under the sole jurisdiction of the Committee on Ethics.(20) The Committee on Ethics may report changes to that House rule that have been referred to it, but such reports are not privileged (unlike proposals to change other House rules reported by the Committee on Rules).(21) The House has also used select committees to review House rules and propose changes, specifi- cally conferring on such select committees the appropriate jurisdiction.(22) Pursuant to section 301(c) of the Budget Act, any budget resolution reported by the Committee on the Budget that proposes to change a rule of the House must be referred to the Committee on Rules so that the committee may review the proposed changes and offer amendments altering or striking such provisions.(23) In one instance, a resolution containing a directive to the Speaker and the Committee on Rules to institute closed–circuit broadcasting of House proceedings was called up as a privileged matter as necessarily in- volving a change in House procedures (though not actually amending the standing rules of the House).(24) While amendments to House rules are normally made through simple res- olutions of the House (such changes being a purely internal House matter), occasionally a bill will contain both statutory provisions and amendments to House rules.(25) In one instance, the House amended the standing rules by incorporating by reference provisions of statutory text: Title I of the Eth- ics in Government Act of 1978 was formally incorporated into the House 16. See 139 CONG. REC. 20361–62, 103d Cong. 1st Sess. (Sept. 8, 1993). See also Deschler’s Precedents Ch. 5 §§ 5.10, 5.11. 17. See § 6.5, infra. See also Deschler’s Precedents Ch. 5 § 5.6. 18. See § 6.6, infra. For more on this type of forum for conducting House business, see Deschler’s Precedents Ch. 19 § 1 and Precedents (Wickham) Ch. 19. 19. See § 6.11, infra. 20. Rule X, clause 1(g), House Rules and Manual § 721b (2019). 21. See § 6.12, infra. 22. See § 6.14, infra. 23. 2 U.S.C. § 632(c). 24. See § 6.13, infra. See also Deschler’s Precedents Ch. 5 § 6.4. 25. For an example of a government ethics bill that made changes in law as well as House rules, see 135 CONG. REC. 29468–69, 29473–75, 29479–83, 101st Cong. 1st Sess. (Nov. 16, 1989). 51 VerDate Nov 24 2008 15:53 Dec 04, 2019 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 8875 Sfmt 8875 F:\PRECEDIT\WORKING\2019VOL02\2019VOL02.PAGETURN.V6.TXT 4473-B Ch. 5 § 6 PRECEDENTS OF THE HOUSE rules by a reference to the statute in clause 2 of rule XXVI.(26) Thus, amend- ments to that title of the Ethics in Government Act will necessarily result in a change in House rules.(27) Although rare, the House has on occasion adopted changes to House rules on a contingent basis, or with a delayed effective date. For example, in the 94th Congress, the House adopted a change to a rule regarding conference procedures contingent upon the Senate adopting a similar rule.(28) Upon no- tice to the House that the Senate had in fact adopted a corresponding change to its rules, the amendment to the House rules became effective.