[Deschler's Precedents]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office via GPO Access]
[DOCID:52093c05_txt-8]
[Page 318-319]
CHAPTER 5
The House Rules, Journal, and Record
A. HOUSE RULES AND MANUAL
Sec. 7. --Abrogation or Waiver
In most cases, the requirements of the rules can be waived or
abrogated through the use of various procedures. The House, for
example, may by unanimous consent agree to a certain order of business,
or may vote to suspend the rules. These procedures are discussed in
detail elsewhere.(1) Generally, the Speaker may recognize
for unanimous-consent requests to waive the requirements of existing
rules unless the rule in question specifies that it is not subject to
waiver.(2) Similarly, the power of the House to change its
rules at any time, as by amendment or by provisions included in
legislative enactments, is recognized, as has been discussed
above.(3) Moreover, it appears that where a motion not in
order under the rules of the House is, without objection, considered
and agreed to, it controls the procedure of the House until carried
out, unless the House takes affirmative action to the
contrary.(4)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. See Ch. 21, infra.
2. See Ch. 21, infra.
For debate of amendments under the five-minute rule, see
Ch. 29, infra.
3. See Sec. 5, supra.
Provisions in a legislative enactment may have the effect
of rendering inapplicable a House rule adopted earlier with
respect to the matters covered in the enactment. Being a later
expression of the will of the House, such enactment may, for
example, expressly authorize that which is prohibited by the
rule. See Sec. 6.2, supra.
4. 114 Cong. Rec. 30214, 90th Cong. 2d Sess., Oct. 9, 1968 (remarks of
Speaker John W. McCormack [Mass.], relating to motion of Mr.
Adams). See Ch. 23, infra, as to the use of motions generally.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The strict terms of a rule have been avoided where the Speaker,
having considered all of the facts and issues involved in a point of
order arising under the terms of the rule, has construed such rule
[[Page 319]]
to be directory and not mandatory.(5)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
5. See Sec. 6.3, supra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A common means by which the rules may be circumvented is for the
Committee on Rules to report, and the House to adopt, a resolution
providing for a particular order of business and specifying the
conditions under which such business will be considered.(6)
Since the Committee on Rules has authority to report resolutions
providing for special orders of business, no point of order against
such a resolution can be based on the fact that adoption of the
resolution would have the effect of abrogating another standing rule of
the House.(7) Thus, by direction of the Committee on Rules,
a resolution may be called up waiving all points of order against a
particular bill. In such manner, a variety of points of order can be
waived. As examples, a resolution may waive points of order that could
otherwise be raised against legislative provisions in appropriation
bills,(8) points of order based on the requirement of
germaneness in amendments to bills,(9) and even points of
order based on the requirements of the Ramseyer rule,(10)
whether the resolution is general in its terms or expressly waives the
requirement of compliance with the Ramseyer rule.(11)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
6. See Chs. 17, 21, infra.
7. Generally, see Ch. 21, infra.
8. See Ch. 26, infra.
For an example of a resolution waiving the provisions of
the house rule relating to unauthorized appropriations and
legislation on general appropriation bills, see 86 Cong. Rec.
3443, 76th Cong. 3d Sess., Mar. 25, 1940 (H. Res. 436).
9. See, for example, 106 Cong. Rec. 10575, 86th Cong. 2d Sess., May
18, 1960. For general discussion of the requirement of
germaneness in amendments to bills, see Ch. 28, infra.
10. As to the Ramseyer rule, requiring in certain circumstances that
committee reports show the effects of proposed bills on
existing law, see Ch. 17, infra.
11. 95 Cong. Rec. 1214, 1218, 81st Cong. 1st Sess., Feb. 15, 1949
(response of Speaker Sam Rayburn [Tex.], to point of order
concerning the First Deficiency Appropriation Bill, 1949).
[[Page 320]]