[Deschler's Precedents]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office via GPO Access]
[DOCID:52093c26_txt-79]
[Page 6489-6491]
CHAPTER 26
Unauthorized Appropriations; Legislation on Appropriation Bills
F. PERMISSIBLE LIMITATIONS ON USE OF FUNDS
Sec. 78. Veterans' Administration
Service-connected Dental Assistance
Sec. Sec. 78.1 To an appropriation bill, an amendment providing that no
part of an appropriation for the Veterans' Administration shall be
available for dental treatment, under specified conditions, was
held in order as a limitation.
On Mar. 31, 1954,(4) the Committee of the Whole was
considering H.R. 8583, an independent offices appropriation bill. A
point of order was raised against an amendment and overruled as
indicated below:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. 100 Cong. Rec. 4262, 4263, 83d Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amendment offered by Mr. [John] Phillips [of California]: On
page 47, line 11, after ``$76,744,000'', insert ``Provided, That no
part of this appropriation shall be available for outpatient dental
services and treatment, or related dental appliances with respect
to a service-connected dental disability which is not compensable
in degree where such condition or disability is not shown to have
been in existence at time of discharge and application for
treatment is made within 1 year after discharge or by July 27,
1954, whichever is later.
Mr. [James P.] Sutton [of Tennessee]: Mr. Chairman, I make the
point of order against the amendment that it is legislation on an
appropriation bill; furthermore, that it changes existing law.
The Chairman: (5) Does the gentleman from California
desire to be heard?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
5. Louis E. Graham (Pa.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Phillips: This is strictly a limitation under the rules. It
saves money.
Mr. Sutton: Mr. Chairman, that is a matter of opinion.
Furthermore, might I say that even if it were not a limitation on
an appropriation, it imposes additional duties.
The Chairman: The Chair is of the opinion that it is a
limitation. The Chair overrules the point of order.
Medical Care for Nonveterans
Sec. 78.2 An amendment providing that ``no part of this appropriation
can be used for hospitalization or examination of persons other
than veterans, unless a reciprocal schedule of pay is in effect
with the agency or department involved'' was held to be a proper
limitation restricting the availability of funds and in order on a
general appropriation bill.
On Jan. 18, 1940,(6) the Committee of the Whole was
considering H.R. 7922, an independent offices appropriation. An amend
[[Page 6490]]
ment was offered and a point of order against it was overruled as
indicated below:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
6. 86 Cong. Rec. 509-11, 76th Cong. 3d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amendment offered by Mr. [James E.] Van Zandt [of
Pennsylvania]: On page 77, line 6, after the period, insert:
``Provided further, That no part of this appropriation can be used
for hospitalization or examination of persons other than veterans,
unless a reciprocal schedule of pay is in effect with the agency or
department involved.''
[Mr. James M. Fitzpatrick, of New York, reserved a point of
order.]
Mr. Van Zandt: During the general debate on this bill, I called
to the attention of the gentleman from Virginia [Mr. Woodrum] the
fact that the employees of several Federal agencies, including the
Civilian Conservation Corps, the Works Progress Administration, the
Post Office Department, the Civil Service Commission, and the
Unemployment Compensation Commission, also beneficiaries of the
Railroad Retirement Board, are being examined by the medical staffs
of the Veterans' Administration facilities scattered throughout the
country. In many cases the employees of these Federal agencies are
hospitalized and spend many weeks in veterans' facilities. I
further pointed out at that time that all of the agencies referred
to reimburse the Veterans' Administration at the rate of $3.75 a
day for each person receiving medical service, with the exception
of the Post Office Department, the Civil Service Commission, and
the Unemployment Compensation Commission. These three agencies
enjoy a special privilege that is charged to the expenses chalked
up for the veterans of our wars. Since that discussion of this
subject on the floor of this House, I have made special inquiry
into this entire matter and I find that the position I took at that
time was sound and correct in every detail.
[The point of order having been made, the ruling thereon was as
follows:]
The Chairman: (7) The gentleman from New York has
made a point of order against the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Pennsylvania.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
7. Lindsay C. Warren (N.C.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Chair is of the opinion that the amendment is in the nature
of a limitation, and therefore, overrules the point of order.
Area and Regional Offices
Sec. 78.3 Language in an appropriation bill providing that ``no part of
this appropriation [for the Veterans' Administration] may be used
for expenses of any area medical or regional representative
offices'' was held to be a limitation and in order.
On May 11, 1965,(8) the Committee of the Whole was
considering H.R. 7997, an independent offices appropriation bill. A
point of order against the following provision in the bill was
overruled:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
8. 111 Cong. Rec. 10168, 89th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For expenses necessary for administration of the medical,
hospital, domi
[[Page 6491]]
ciliary, construction and supply, research, employee education and
training activities, as authorized by law, $12,596,000: Provided,
That no part of this appropriation may be used for expenses of any
area medical or regional representative offices.
Mr. [John P.] Saylor [of Pennsylvania]: Mr. Chairman, I make a
point of order against the language on page 40, line 8, beginning
with the word ``Provided'' through line 10, as being legislation on
an appropriation bill.
The Chairman: (9) Does the gentleman from Texas
desire to be heard on the point of order?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
9. Richard Bolling (Mo.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. [Albert] Thomas [of Texas]: Mr. Chairman, that is purely a
limitation on the use of funds. We cannot admit that point of
order.
The Chairman: . . . The language is clearly a limitation on the
use of funds. The point of order is overruled.