Chapter CCXXIV. 1 GERMANE LEGISLATION RETRENCHING EXPENDITURES IN APPROPRIATION BILLS. 1. The Holman rule. Sections 1481, 1482. 2. What constitutes retrenchment. Sections 1483–1502. 3. Reduction of number and salary of officers of the United States. Sections 1503– 1514. 4. Reduction of Compensation of persons paid out of Treasury. Section 1515–1517. 5. Reduction of amounts covered by bill. Sections 1518–1526. 6. Proposition must show on its face a retrenchment of expenditure. Sections 1527– 1546. 7. Proposition must be germane. Sections 1547–1549. 8. When accompanied by additional legislation. Sections 1550–1554. 9. General decisions. Sections 1555–1560. 1481. An exception to the rule forbidding legislation in a general appropriation bill admits germane legislation retrenching expenditures. Section 2 of Rule XXI provides: Nor shall any provisions in any such bill or amendment thereto changing existing law be in order, except such as being germane to the subject matter of the bill shall retrench expenditures by the reduc- tion of the number and salary of the officers of the United States, by the reduction of the compensation of any person paid out of the Treasury of the United States, or by the reduction of amounts of money covered by the bill. The original rule adopted in 1835 2 forbidding legislative provisions in general appropriation bills gradually became construed through a long line of decisions to admit amendments increasing salaries but as excluding amendments providing for decreases. To remedy this defeat the House in 1876 3 on motion of Mr. William S. Holman, of Indiana, amended to the rule to include the following: nor shall any provision in any such bill or amendment thereto, changing existing law, be in order except such as, being germane to the subject-matter of the bill, shall retrench expenditures. There was some difference of opinion as to the efficacy of the rule in this form and in the revision of 1880 4 the provision was omitted in the report of the Com- mittee on Rules. The House declined to approve the omission and after extended debate readopted the provision as follows: Nor shall any provision in any such bill or amendment thereto changing existing law be in order, except such as, being germane to the subject-matter of the bill, shall retrench expenditures by the 1 Supplementary to sections 3885–3892 of Chapter XCVII. 2 First session Twenty-fourth Congress, debates, pp. 1949–57. 3 First session Forty-fourth Congress, Record, p. 445 4 Second session Forty-sixth Congress, Congressional Record, p. 201. 492 VerDate 11-MAY-2000 09:17 Apr 09, 2002 Jkt 063208 PO 00000 Frm 00490 Fmt 8687 Sfmt 8687 D:\DISC\63208.244 txed01 PsN: txed01 LEGISLATION RETRENCHING EXPENDITURES IN APPROPRIATIONS. 493 reduction of the number and salary of the officers of the United States, by the reduction of the com- pensation any person paid out of the Treasury of the United States, or by the reduction of amounts of money covered by the bill. In this form the provision remained unchanged until 1885 1 when it was again omitted in response to objections that it admitted legislation in the form of riders tending to nullify the effect of the rule as a whole. The provision was again inserted in the rule for the Fifty-second and Fifty- third Congresses and again discontinued from the Fifty-fourth to the Sixty-first Congresses, inclusive. With the adoption of the rules for the Sixty-second Congress in 1911 2 it was again incorporated in the rule in its present form and is now a permanent part of the procedure of the House. 1482. The rule admitting legislation to a general appropriation bill when germane and effecting retrenchment of expenditures applies to gen- eral appropriation bills only. On September 23, 1919,3 the House was in the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for the consideration of the joint resolution (H.J. Res. 208) authorizing the Secretary of War to expend $116,000 for the support of the Army at Camp Hunphreys, Virginia, when Mr. Joseph G. Cannon, of Illinois, offered this amendment: Strike out ‘‘$116,000’’and insert in lieu thereof ‘‘$115,900: Provided, That the Engineer school shall be returned to its former location at Washington Barracks by the end of the present fiscal year.’’ Mr. Charles Pope Caldwell, of New York, raised a question of order on the amendment. Mr. Cannon submitted that the amendment was in order as a retrenchment of expenditure. The Chairman 4 held: The bill provides that the Secretary of War is authorized to expend a certain sum of money for the completion of bungalow quarters, now partially constructed, including gravel roads, walks, side- walks, sewers, electric-light lines, heating, water lines, painting, clearing, brushing, grading, sodding, and alteration of existing buildings and miscellaneous incidental construction incident thereto, $116,000. The amendment proposes to reduce the appropriation to $115,900, with the following proviso: ‘‘That the engineer school shall be returned to its former location at Washington Barracks by the end of the present fiscal year.’’ The Holman rule applies only to general appropriation bills. It can not be invoked as to this bill. So far as the question of germaneness is concerned, it is clear to the Chair that under section 7 of Rule XVI, which reads as follows: ‘‘And no motion or proposition on a subject different from that under consideration shall be admitted under color of amendment’’— the amendment is not germane. The point of order is sustained, and the Clerk will read. 1 First session Forty-ninth Congress, Record, p. 333. 2 First session Sixty-second Congress, Record, p. 80. 3 First session Sixty-sixth Congress, Record, p. 5799. 4 J. Hampton Moore, of Pennsylvania, Chairman. VerDate 11-MAY-2000 09:17 Apr 09, 2002 Jkt 063208 PO 00000 Frm 00491 Fmt 8687 Sfmt 8687 D:\DISC\63208.244 txed01 PsN: txed01 494 PRECEDENTS OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. § 1482 1483. To come within the exception under which legislation is in order on an appropriation bill, an amendment must be germane, must retrench expenditure, and the language in which it is embodied must be essential to the accomplishment of the retrenchment. On February 29, 1932, 1 the Treasury and Post Office Department appropria- tion bill was under consideration in the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union, when the following paragraph was reached: The offices of comptrollers of customs, surveyors of customs, and appraisers of merchandise, 29 in all, with annual salaries aggregating $153,800, are hereby abolished. The duties imposed by law and regulation upon comptrollers, surveyors, and appraisers of customs, their assistants and deputies are hereby transferred to, imposed upon, and continued in positions, now established in the Customs Service. Mrs. Florence P. Kahn, of California, made the point of order that the para- graph included legislation. Mr. Joseph W. Byrns, of Tennessee, justified the language of the paragraph on the ground that it provided for a reduction in the number and salaries of officers of the United States and was admissible as a retrenchment. The Chairman2 overruled the point of order and said: It would seem to the Chair that this paragraph is safely in the Holman rule. To be in order under the Holman rule three things must occur—first, it must be germane; second, it must retrench expendi- tures; and, third, the language embodied in the paragraph must be confined solely to the purpose of retrenching expenditures. The Chair finds upon examination of the paragraph that it is germane to the portion of the bill wherein it is inserted. The paragraph on its face definitely reduces the number of officers of the United States by 29 and thereby saves $153,800, thus retrenching expenditures. The remaining question for the Chair to determine is whether there is any language in the para- graph that is legislation which does not contribute to the retrenchment of the $153,800. The Chair has examined the paragraph with considerable care in order to determine whether the legislation is coupled up with and essential to the reduction of money. It is apparent to the Chair that all the legislation to be found in the paragraph is necessary to accomplish the purpose of retrenching expenditures. The Chair thinks that the paragraph clearly comes within the provisions of the Holman rule and overrules the point of order. 1484. An amendment establishing a minimum rate of compensation was held not to provide for a reduction of expenditures. On May 17, 1892,3 the sundry civil appropriation bill was under consideration in the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union, when the Clerk read this paragraph: Salaries and commissions of registers and receivers: For salaries and commissions of registers of land offices and receivers of public moneys at district land offices, at not exceeding $3,000 each, $55,000. Mr. John A. Pickler, of South Dakota, offered the following amendment: Amend by adding after the word ‘‘each’’ the words ‘‘and not less than $1,000 each.’’ Mr. William S. Holman, of Indiana, having made the point of order on the amendment, the Chairman,4 after debate, sustained the point of order. 1 First session Seventy-second Congress, Record, p. 4957. 2 Edgar Howard, of Nebraska, Chairman. 3 First session Fifty-second Congress, Record, p. 4337. 4 Rufus E. Lester, of Georgia, Chairman. VerDate 11-MAY-2000 09:17 Apr 09, 2002 Jkt 063208 PO 00000 Frm 00492 Fmt 8687 Sfmt 8687 D:\DISC\63208.245 txed01 PsN: txed01 § 1483 LEGISLATION RETRENCHING EXPENDITURES IN APPROPRIATIONS. 495 1485.