# A Retrospective of House Rules Changes Since the 104th Congress through the 109th Congress > Briefs, arguments, decisions, and more. URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/crs%3ARL33610 ## Record - **Collection:** Congressional research report - **Document type:** CRS Report - **Published:** March 8, 2012 - **Citation:** RL33610 ## Text A Retrospective of House Rules Changes Since the 104th Congress through the 109th Congress /name redacted/ Senior Specialist in American National Government /name redacted/ Specialist on the Congress March 8, 2012 Congressional Research Service 7-.... www.crs.gov RL33610 CRS Report for Congress Prepared for Members and Committees of Congress A Retrospective of House Rules Changes Since the 104th Congress through 109th Congress Summary One of the majority party’s prerogatives is writing the House rules and using its majority status to effect the chamber’s rules on the day the new House convenes. It is a feature of the House that it must adopt rules at the convening of each Congress. While each new House largely adopts the chamber rules that existed in the previous Congress, each new House also adopts changes to those rules. Institutional and political developments during the Democratic majority, particularly during the 103rd Congress, were a prelude to the rules changes made by the Republicans when they took control of the House in the 104th Congress. Rules changes made at the convening of the 104th Congress addressed most aspects of the committee system: decision-making autonomy, jurisdictions, internal committee procedures and structure, and staff. Rules changes for the 104th Congress and after also addressed most aspects of legislation deliberations on the House floor and organization of the chamber. For example, the minority was guaranteed the ability to offer the motion to recommit with instructions, commemorative legislation was banned, the names of signatories of discharge petitions were publicized, provisions were made for convening a House with a reduced membership due to a terrorist attack, and the Speaker was subjected to a term limit that was later repealed. Two of the eight goals of the Republicans’ 1994 Contract with America dealt with budgetary legislation. House rules were changed to require a three-fifths vote to pass a federal income tax rate increase, and cost estimates replaced baselines as the preferred way of understanding the year-to-year changes in federal spending. Rules changes in the administration of the House were extensive. Offices were abolished and others created. Responsibilities were shifted and accountability clarified. Rules changes affecting ethical standards were largely technical, with most major changes taking place through freestanding and other legislation. The House rules changes made starting in the 104th Congress reflected a Republican frame of reference that was built over many years as the minority party. Most rules, however, did not change, either at all or substantially, since they had evolved over decades to support the majority in its organization and operation of the House. Rules changes do not necessarily enable a majority to pass legislation, to overcome voter sentiments, or to work smoothly with the minority. Rules facilitate the majority’s organization and operation of the House; they do not dictate to party leaders and others how to run the House or what outcomes can be achieved. This report describes and analyzes only rules changes made on the opening day of a new Congress, but it references in footnotes selected other legislation and actions that also changed or affected House rules during the 104th Congress and during subsequent Congresses. This report is the first in a series on House rules changes at the beginning of a Congress. For changes in the 110th, 111th, and 112th Congresses, see CRS Report R42395, A Retrospective of . This House Rules Changes Since the 110th Congress, by (name redacted) and (name redacted) report will not be updated. Congressional Research Service A Retrospective of House Rules Changes Since the 104th Congress through 109th Congress Contents Introduction...................................................................................................................................... 1 The 103rd Congress: Prelude to Change........................................................................................... 3 103rd Congress Rules ................................................................................................................. 5 Republican Critique................................................................................................................... 7 Republican Procedural Actions ........................................................................................... 9 Joint Committee on the Organization of Congress.................................................................. 12 Legislative-Executive Relations........................................................................................ 13 Committee System ............................................................................................................ 14 Floor Procedure................................................................................................................. 14 Budgetary Legislation ....................................................................................................... 15 Ethics Process.................................................................................................................... 15 Staffing and Support Agencies .......................................................................................... 15 Information Technology .................................................................................................... 16 Public Understanding ........................................................................................................ 16 Action on the JCOC Recommendations in the 103rd Congress......................................... 16 Contract with America............................................................................................................. 17 Recodification of House Rules, 106th Congress ............................................................................ 17 Rules Changes Affecting Committees ........................................................................................... 19 Structure and Organization ...................................................................................................... 20 Assignments and Size........................................................................................................ 20 Chairmanships/Term Limitations ...................................................................................... 22 Committee Abolition......................................................................................................... 22 Committee Creation and Retention ................................................................................... 22 Committee Names ............................................................................................................. 24 Jurisdiction ........................................................................................................................ 25 Subcommittees .................................................................................................................. 28 Procedure................................................................................................................................. 29 Committee Reports............................................................................................................ 29 Conference, Motion to Go to............................................................................................. 31 Hearings Procedures.......................................................................................................... 31 Meetings, Restrictions on.................................................................................................. 32 Openness ........................................................................................................................... 32 Oversight ........................................................................................................................... 33 Proxy Voting...................................................................................................................... 34 Quorums............................................................................................................................ 34 Recess Authority ............................................................................................................... 34 Referral.............................................................................................................................. 34 Subpoenas ......................................................................................................................... 35 Transcripts......................................................................................................................... 36 Voting ................................................................................................................................ 36 Witnesses........................................................................................................................... 36 Staff and Funding .................................................................................................................... 36 Allocation of Staff ............................................................................................................. 37 Associate Staff................................................................................................................... 37 Funding ............................................................................................................................. 37 Number of Staff................................................................................................................. 38 Congressional Research Service A Retrospective of House Rules Changes Since the 104th Congress through 109th Congress Rules Changes Affecting the Chamber and Floor.......................................................................... 38 Adjourn, Motion to.................................................................................................................. 39 Admission to the Chamber ...................................................................................................... 39 Amendment Process ................................................................................................................ 40 Appropriations Process............................................................................................................ 40 Bill Introductions..................................................................................................................... 41 Classified Materials ................................................................................................................. 42 Commemorative Legislation ................................................................................................... 42 Conference............................................................................................................................... 42 Motion to Instruct Conferees............................................................................................. 42 Congressional Record.............................................................................................................. 43 Continuity of Congress............................................................................................................ 43 Emergency Recess............................................................................................................. 43 Quorums............................................................................................................................ 44 Speaker Succession ........................................................................................................... 45 Corrections Calendar ............................................................................................................... 45 Decorum and Debate ............................................................................................................... 45 Decorum............................................................................................................................ 45 Debate ............................................................................................................................... 46 Electronic Devices............................................................................................................. 46 Exhibits and Handouts ...................................................................................................... 47 Delegates/Resident Commissioner .......................................................................................... 47 Discharge Petitions.................................................................................................................. 47 District of Columbia Legislation ............................................................................................. 48 Order of Business .................................................................................................................... 48 Public Debt Ceiling ................................................................................................................. 48 Public Works............................................................................................................................ 48 Question of Privileges of the House ........................................................................................ 49 Recommit, Motion to............................................................................................................... 49 Speaker of the House............................................................................................................... 49 Special Order Speeches and Other Non-Legislative Debate ................................................... 50 Special Rules ........................................................................................................................... 50 Suspension of the Rules........................................................................................................... 51 Tax Legislation ........................................................................................................................ 51 Unanimous Consent................................................................................................................. 52 Unfunded Mandates................................................................................................................. 52 Voting ...................................................................................................................................... 52 Postponed Votes ................................................................................................................ 53 Rules Changes Affecting Budgetary Legislation........................................................................... 54 104th Congress ......................................................................................................................... 54 105th Congress ......................................................................................................................... 56 106th Congress ......................................................................................................................... 57 107th Congress ......................................................................................................................... 58 108th Congress ......................................................................................................................... 58 109th Congress ......................................................................................................................... 60 Rules Changes Affecting Administration of the House ................................................................. 60 104th Congress ......................................................................................................................... 61 House Officers................................................................................................................... 61 Other Administrative Changes .......................................................................................... 62 Congressional Research Service A Retrospective of House Rules Changes Since the 104th Congress through 109th Congress 105th Congress ......................................................................................................................... 63 106th Congress ......................................................................................................................... 63 107th Congress ......................................................................................................................... 64 Rules Changes Affecting Ethics Standards.................................................................................... 64 104th Congress ......................................................................................................................... 65 105th Congress ......................................................................................................................... 65 106th Congress ......................................................................................................................... 66 107th Congress ......................................................................................................................... 67 108th Congress ......................................................................................................................... 67 109th Congress ......................................................................................................................... 68 Concluding Observations............................................................................................................... 69 Tables Table 1. Summary of Republican Rules Package, 103rd Congress ................................................ 10 Table 2. Structure of House Rules before and after Recodification............................................... 18 Contacts Author Contact Information........................................................................................................... 71 Congressional Research Service A Retrospective of House Rules Changes Since the 104th Congress through 109th Congress Introduction In the 1994 general election, Republicans won a majority of seats in the House for the first time since the 83rd Congress (1953-1955). By practice, the majority party organizes the House. It elects its Speaker, chairs its committees, holds majorities on its committees, selects its officers, and manages its legislative agenda. One of the majority’s prerogatives is writing the House’s rules and using its majority status to effect the chamber’s rules on the day the new House convenes. It is a feature of the House, but not of the Senate, that it must adopt rules at the convening of each Congress. It is also a feature of the House that it relies heavily on its formal rules, and formal means of temporarily changing them, rather than on the informal, ad hoc procedures so often used in the Senate. Although each new House largely adopts the chamber rules that existed in the previous Congress, each new House also adopts changes to those rules. Among the many subjects that the rules may cover, these changes can strengthen the ability of the majority to control the legislative process and the legislative agenda, and they can bestow rights on the minority party, minority interests, and individual Members.1 The changes made by the Republican majority in the 104th Congress rules resolution and in subsequent rules resolutions adopted by Republican majorities through the 109th Congress addressed nearly every aspect of the legislative process, budget process, committee organization, administrative operations, and ethical standards. The changes the Republican majority made were not conceived solely in the days following the 1994 elections, but drew on many experiences and sources. This report has two principal parts reflecting its two principal purposes. The first part analyzes the sources of Republican rules changes. Republicans built their critique of Democratic management of the House over many years. In drafting rules for the 104th and subsequent Congresses and in other exercises of the House’s rulemaking authority, Republicans could draw on their experience and on a variety of partisan and bipartisan plans and proposals. The first purpose of the report is to identify the sources of the broad rewriting of House rules in the 104th Congress and additional changes in subsequent Congresses. The second part of the report organizes rules changes affecting committees and the House floor topically and changes affecting budgetary legislation, House administration, and ethics by Congress, and briefly explains the changes in layman’s terms. These changes were included in the rules resolutions adopted at the beginning of the 104th through 109th Congresses, special orders adopted in conjunction with the rules resolutions, and Speakers’ policy announcements made at the convening of each of these Congresses.2 The major topical headings for this part of the report are as follows: 1 The Constitution empowers the House and Senate to make their rules: “Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings....” U.S. Const. art. I, §5, cl. 2. 2 The rules resolution in the 104th Congress was H.Res. 6; the rules resolutions in the 105th through 109th Congresses were all numbered H.Res. 5. Debate on rules packages (including the text of the resolutions containing the rules changes, section-by-section explanations, and other materials inserted by Members) and the Speaker’s announcements appeared in the Congressional Record as follows: (1) H.Res. 5 (special rule) and H.Res. 6 (104th Congress rules): “Making in Order Immediate Consideration of House Resolution Adopting the Rules of the House of Representatives for the 104th Congress” and “Rules of the (continued...) Congressional Research Service 1 A Retrospective of House Rules Changes Since the 104th Congress through 109th Congress • “Rules Changes Affecting Committees” • “Rules Changes Affecting the Chamber and Floor” • “Rules Changes Affecting Budgetary Legislation” • “Rules Changes Affecting Administration of the House” • “Rules Changes Affecting Ethics Standards” Each of these major headings is further subdivided by topic or by Congress. The second purpose of the report is to catalogue and briefly explain by topic—regardless of the location of a topic in one or more rules—specific changes to rules over the course of Republican majority control of the House. This report supplements the official source of rules changes, the House Rules and Manual.3 This volume, printed in each Congress to reflect adoption of a rules resolution, contains the current provisions of House rules. For each rule, it also contains the House parliamentarian’s notes describing changes to the rule (or its specific clauses) and decisions of presiding officers and the House based upon the rule. Rules in the House Rules and Manual are arranged by rule number.4 This report does not describe all of the actions taken during each Congress that effected permanent and temporary organizational, procedural, administrative, and other changes in the operation of the House. In addition to changes made through rules resolutions, such changes were made through freestanding legislation and as provisions of bills or resolutions, and in report language on legislation and in joint explanatory statements accompanying conference reports.5 Legislative branch appropriations bills and budgetary legislation contained organizational, (...continued) House,” Congressional Record, vol. 141, part 1 (January 4, 1995), pp. 447-530. Speaker’s announcements: “Policies of the Chair,” Congressional Record, vol. 141, part 1 (January 4, 1995), pp. 551-553. (2) H.Res. 5 (105th Congress rules): “Rules of the House,” Congressional Record, vol. 143, part 1 (January 7, 1997), pp. 121-141. Speaker’s announcements: “Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore on Procedures for the 105th Congress,” Congressional Record, vol. 143, part 1 (January 7, 1997), pp. 146-148. (3) H.Res. 5 (recodification of House rules, and 106th Congress rules): “Rules of the House,” Congressional Record, vol. 145, part 1 (January 6, 1999), pp. 47-234. Speaker’s announcements: “Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore,” Congressional Record, vol. 145, part 1 (January 6, 1999), pp. 246, 247-249. (4) H.Res. 5 (107th Congress rules): “Rules of the House,” Congressional Record, vol. 147, part 1 (January 3, 2001), pp. 24-37. Speaker’s announcements: “Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore,” Congressional Record, vol. 147, part 1 (January 3, 2001), pp. 39-41. (5) H.Res. 5 (108th Congress rules): “Rules of the House,” Congressional Record, vol. 149, part 1 (January 7, 2003), pp. 7-21. Speaker’s announcements: “Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore,” Congressional Record, vol. 149, part 1 (January 7, 2003), pp. 22-24. (6) H.Res. 5 (109th Congress rules): “Rules of the House,” Congressional Record, vol. 151, part 1 (January 4, 2005), pp. 42-67. Speaker’s announcements: “Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore,” Congressional Record, vol. 151, part 1 (January 4, 2005), pp. 69-71. 3 Constitution, Jefferson’s Manual, and Rules of the House of Representatives of the United States, [number] Congress, prepared by [name], parliamentarian, [number] Cong., 2nd sess., H.Doc. [number] (Washington, DC: GPO, [year]). 4 For additional information, see CRS Report 98-262, House Rules Manual: Summary of Contents, by (name redacted). 5 For a history of attempts at broad-based changes to House rules in the modern era, some implemented and some not implemented, see CRS Report RL31835, Reorganization of the House of Representatives: Modern Reform Efforts, by (name redacted), (name redacted), and (name redacted). Congressional Research Service 2 A Retrospective of House Rules Changes Since the 104th Congress through 109th Congress procedural, and other changes that were temporary or permanent. So-called fast-track or expedited House procedures were included in legislation that otherwise addressed a policy matter. Democratic Caucus and Republican Conference rules and decisions also had an impact on how specific House rules (such as rules on suspension of the rules and on committee assignment limits) were implemented. In a few instances, changes made by means other than the House rules resolution are described, where necessary to understand changes made in rules resolutions. Selected references to relevant freestanding bills and resolutions, however, are provided in footnotes in the report. Between the 104th and 109th Congresses, some committees were created and others were abolished, and some committees’ names were changed. In this report, the names of committees appear as they existed in the specific Congress referenced. Following the next section, “The 103rd Congress: Prelude to Change,” there is a section titled “Recodification of House Rules, 106th Congress.” During the 105th Congress (1997-1999), a Rules Committee task force completed the first recodification of House rules since the 1880s. Citations appearing in this report are only to the recodified rules. The parliamentarian’s notes in the House Rules and Manual, attached to specific rules, clauses, or paragraphs, trace the recodification of specific provisions of House rules, in addition to changes to the text of the rules. This report is the first in a series on House rules changes.6 A second report currently covers changes for the 110th through 112th Congresses: CRS Report R42395, A Retrospective of House Rules Changes Since the 110th Congress, by (name redacted) and (name redacted). It is also divided into two parts, with the first part covering the partisan critique of the majority party’s management of the House—a source of rules changes when the majority changed—and the second part organizing rules changes topically. The topic headings in reports in the series are the same, to the extent that the same procedural and other topics were addressed in each time frame. The 103rd Congress: Prelude to Change The House rules changes made in the 104th Congress reflected a Republican frame of reference that was built over many years as the minority party, including more democratic floor processes, minority party rights, a subordinate role for seniority, accountability in House operations, and streamlining of the House’s organization and staffing. The rules changes in the succeeding five Republican-organized Congresses continued to draw on this frame of reference, but also drew on current experiences in managing the House. While Republican Members as members of the minority party for 40 years had less invested in the status quo of the House than Democratic Members, they nonetheless had some investment, such as the opportunity awaiting those Republican Members who might assume the chairmanship of a committee on which they had long served as ranking minority Member. These interests also influenced the final 104th Congress rules package. Republican criticisms relevant to the changes made in the 104th Congress began with the decisions on rules made at the direction of the Democratic Caucus beginning after the 1974 6 In the 1994 general election, Republicans won a majority of seats in the House for the first time since the 83rd Congress (1953-1955). They maintained their House majority through five consecutive elections, until the 2006 election. This report covers that time period. Congressional Research Service 3 A Retrospective of House Rules Changes Since the 104th Congress through 109th Congress election. The Committee Reform Amendments,7 agreed to just a month before the 1974 elections, had abolished proxy voting in committees and allocated to the minority one-third of statutory committee staff and one-third of investigative committee staff. The rules for the House in 94th Congress (1975-1977) restored proxy voting, although requiring proxies to be given in writing, and abrogated the committee staff allocation formula, with minority committee staffing in the 94th Congress anticipated to be about 20% of total committee staffing.8 As the Democratic majority began innovating in the 1970s and 1980s with special rules—such as modified closed rules and “king of the Hill” rules—to give a procedural advantage to its preferred policy outcome,9 Republican House Members formed groups, such as the Conservative Opportunity Society and the Republican ‘92 Group, to contest Democrats’ legislative management of the House by employing House procedures to attract attention, to critique Democratic proposals, and to develop and publicize substantive Republican alternatives. The Conservative Opportunity Society, founded by then-Representative Newt Gingrich in 1983, promoted conservative proposals as an alternative to the so-called welfare state.10 The ’92 Group, named for the goal of electing a Republican majority in the House in 1992, was founded by Republican moderates such as then-Representatives Olympia Snowe and Tom Tauke. It also advanced proposals for governing as an alternative to Democratic legislation.11 Then, in the 102nd and 103rd Congresses, scandals cast a pall over public perceptions of Congress, exposing Members’ special treatment and self-dealing, and contributing to the public’s sense of disconnection between Members of Congress and their constituents. The disclosure of damaging information began in 1991 with an investigation of the House post office stamp clerks for embezzlement and drug dealing. A reported allegation by a post office supervisor that he had helped Members of Congress “get thousands of dollars in cash through phony transactions disguised as stamp purchases” led to subpoenas for the records of three Members, one of whom was the chair of the Ways and Means Committee, Representative Dan Rostenkowski.12 On May 31, 1994, Representative Rostenkowski was indicted on 17 criminal charges involving embezzlement, fraud, and coverup. In September 1991, a General Accounting Office audit revealed that Members had written 8,331 bad checks (non-sufficient fund checks) in the 12 months ending June 30, 1990, at the House bank, a check-cashing service in the Capitol for Members and staff. Later that month, House Administration Committee members revealed that more than 250 Members were in arrears for 7 H.Res. 988, agreed to in the House October 8, 1974. “Congressional Reforms Made in 1975,” Congressional Quarterly Almanac, 1975, vol. XXXI (Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Inc., 1976), p. 30. See also, for example, Rep. Bill Frenzel, “Rules of the House,” Congressional Record, vol. 121, part 1 (January 14, 1975), p. 25. 9 Steven S. Smith, “Taking It to the Floor,” in Lawrence C. Dodd and Bruce I. Oppenheimer, eds., Congress Reconsidered, 4th ed. (Washington, DC: CQ Press, 1989), pp. 331-350. 10 Public Broadcasting Service, Frontline, “The Long March of New Gingrich,” original air date of January 16, 1996, interview with Rep. Vin Weber, available at http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/newt/newtintwshtml/weber.html. 11 Susan Webb Hammond, “Congressional Caucuses and Party Leaders in the House of Representatives,” Political Science Quarterly, vol. 106, no. 2 (Summer 1991), pp. 277-294; and William F. Connelly Jr. and John J. Pitney Jr., Congress’ Permanent Minority: Republicans in the House (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers Inc., 1994), pp. 27-30. 12 “Post Office Probe Hints at Large Scandal,” Congressional Quarterly Almanac, 1992, vol. XLVIII (Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Inc., 1993), p. 50. 8 Congressional Research Service 4 A Retrospective of House Rules Changes Since the 104th Congress through 109th Congress bills at House restaurants for more than $255,000. In March 1992, the House voted to release the bad check audit data, including Members’ names. In May 1992, the ranking Republican Member of the House Appropriations Committee was separately indicted on bribery and illegal gratuities charges. In August 1992, a Democratic Member from Massachusetts was separately indicted on charges of extortion, racketeering, and tax evasion. In the 102nd and 103rd Congresses, a greater than usual number of Members of both chambers were investigated by their house’s respective ethics committees or federal authorities and a number of Members of the House were indicted.13 Facing a volatile electorate in the 1992 elections, 52 Representatives retired, 19 were defeated in primaries, and 24 were defeated in the general election. While the state of the economy set the tone for the 1992 elections, the scandals, particularly the House bank scandal, figured prominently in incumbents’ decisions not to run for reelection and in incumbents’ defeat.14 In the 1994 election, voters ended Democrats’ 40-year majority in the House. While a desire for change was a theme that political observers found among the electorate, a significant group of voters responded specifically to the Republicans’ campaign manifesto, the Contract with America, which called for “institutional reforms designed to make the House less cumbersome and more accountable.”15 The Republicans’ 104th Congress rules package, subsequent rules packages, and other exercises of the House’s rulemaking authority drew many specific changes from experiences like these and from three principal sources: the Republican alternative rules package in the 103rd Congress, the recommendations of the Joint Committee on the Organization of Congress, and the House Republicans’ Contract with America.16 These three sources are discussed in detail in this section. 103rd Congress Rules The Democratic Caucus at its early organization meeting in December 1992 approved a number of rules changes, which continued to be developed until the rules package (H.Res. 5) was put before the House at the convening of the 103rd Congress on January 5, 1993. Except for a rules change that removed the House general counsel from the Office of the Clerk and created an 13 For background information on ethics matters, including House votes on them, in the 102nd Congress, see Congressional Quarterly Almanac, 1992, vol. XLVIII (Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Inc., 1993): “Voters Enraged Over House Banking Abuses,” pp. 23-46; “Post Office Probe Hints at Large Scandal,” pp. 47-51; “Cloud of Scandal Hovers over Capitol Hill,” pp. 51-55; and “House Tightens Limits on Franked Mail,” p. 61. For background information on ethics matters in the 103rd Congress, see Congressional Quarterly Almanac, 1993, vol. XLIX (Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Inc., 1994): “Rostenkowski Investigated in Stamp Scam,” pp. 64-68, and “Indictments, Convictions Plague Congress,” pp. 68-74; and Congressional Quarterly Almanac, 1994, vol. L (Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Inc., 1995): “Rostenkowski Indicted, Defeated,” pp. 43-48, and “Misconduct Charges Plague Members,” pp. 50-55. 14 Phil Kuntz, “House Bank Overdrafts Send a Chill through Campaigns of Incumbents,” Congressional Quarterly Weekly Report, vol. 50, no. 42, October 24, 1992, pp. 3328-3329; Dave Kaplan and Charles Mahtesian, “Election’s Wave of Diversity Spares Many Incumbents,” Congressional Quarterly Weekly Report, vol. 50, no. 44, November 7, 1992, pp. 3570-3576; and Phil Kuntz, “Overdrafts Were a Potent Charge,” Congressional Quarterly Weekly Report, vol. 50, no. 44, November 7, 1992, p. 3575. 15 Robert W. Merry, “Voters’ Demand for Change Puts Clinton on Defensive,” Congressional Quarterly Weekly Report, vol. 52, no. 44, November 12, 1994, pp. 3207-3209. 16 See, for example, Jeffrey L. Katz, “Republicans Dust Off Blueprints for Changing House Operations,” Congressional Quarterly Weekly Report, vol. 52, no. 44, November 12, 1994, pp. 3220-3221. Congressional Research Service 5 A Retrospective of House Rules Changes Since the 104th Congress through 109th Congress Office of General Counsel under the Speaker and another rules change that conformed House rules on franked mail to a new law of the 102nd Congress,17 the Democratic rules package was silent on the ethics issues of the previous Congresses.18 An innovation included in the rules package provided a vote in the Committee of the Whole to the four Delegates and the Puerto Rican Resident Commissioner, and allowed these five individuals to chair the Committee of the Whole as other Members were able to do. This change also allowed a re-vote in the House if the Delegates’ or Resident Commissioner’s vote affected the outcome of a vote in the Committee of the Whole. The Delegates and Resident Commissioner were not given a vote in the House meeting as the House. The Delegates and Resident Commissioner could also be appointed to any conference committee, not just those created for legislation reported from a committee on which they served. During debate, Democratic Members portrayed this change as a matter of fairness and democracy in action, and pointed out the services of citizenship undertaken by residents of the territories, Puerto Rico, and the District of Columbia. They argued that allowing the Delegates and Resident Commissioner to vote in the Committee of the Whole did not flout constitutional requirements since their votes could not affect the outcome of votes in the House.19 (The counter-argument appears below under “Republican Critique.”) Democratic Members indicated that other major changes proposed to the House rules were made for purposes of legislative efficiency and productivity, although Republicans challenged this explanation and countered with their own proposed rules changes, as explained below (see “Republican Critique”). Committees were allowed to meet while the House was sitting under the five-minute rule, without having to seek permission to do so. Committee records were dispositive on the presence of a quorum to report a measure, reducing the opportunity to raise a point of order on the floor, and a point of order on the floor was prohibited in most instances when a measure was reported by a voice vote or unanimous consent. (A counter-argument appears below under “Republican Critique.”) Moribund general teller vote procedures (a method of counting votes without recording individual Members’ positions) in the Committee of the Whole were eliminated; the possibility of recorded tellers remained in the event the electronic voting system malfunctioned. 17 The 103rd Congress rules package proposed to conform House rules to provisions of the fiscal 1993 Legislative Branch Appropriations Act (P.L. 102-392), which disallowed Members from using the frank for mass mailings outside of their districts. 18 Democrats had nonetheless earlier implemented reforms. In the 102nd Congress, for example, the House on April 9, 1992, agreed to H.Res. 423, the House Administrative Reform Resolution of 1992. Among its provisions, this resolution abolished the Office of Postmaster of the House, removed certain authorities of the Clerk and Sergeant-atArms of the House, created a bipartisan Subcommittee on Administrative Oversight of the Committee on House Administration, and established two new entities: the Director of Non-Legislative and Financial Services and the Office of Inspector General. See “House Approves Hiring of Professional Administrator,” Congressional Quarterly Almanac, 1992, vol. XLVIII (Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Inc., 1993), pp. 55-56. The scandals also gave impetus to the creation of a new Joint Committee on the Organization of Congress, to report recommendations at the end of 1993. See “Lawmakers Look for Ways to Improve Operations,” Congressional Quarterly Almanac, 1992, vol. XLVIII (Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Inc., 1993), pp. 56-57. Votes occurred on additional resolutions during the 102nd Congress to authorize investigations, such as one concerning the House bank, and to release information, such as the list of all sitting and former Members who had written overdraft checks. For background information, see the sources listed at footnote no. 13. 19 Debate on the 103rd Congress House rules appears in Congressional Record, vol. 139, part 1 (January 5, 1993), pp. 49-100. Congressional Research Service 6 A Retrospective of House Rules Changes Since the 104th Congress through 109th Congress The Speaker was authorized to declare short recesses throughout a Congress, rather than only by authorization of a special rule, a general authority previously granted only at the end of a Congress. If a question of the privileges of the House was raised by the majority or minority leader, it would be considered immediately. If a privileges of the House resolution was offered by another Member, it would be noticed, and the Speaker was required to schedule debate on it within two legislative days. Debate time on a question of the privileges of the House would be divided between the proponent, on the one hand, and the leadership of the party in opposition to the motion, on the other, as determined by the Speaker. This change allowed the Speaker to put off debate on any privileges of the House resolution not raised by the majority or minority leader to a time of the Speaker’s, majority’s, or House’s preference, and took half of debate time away from the proponent of a question of privileges, who previously controlled all debate time. In instances where the Senate added legislative language to a general appropriation bill and a motion was made in the House to, in the motion’s effect, agree to a change in existing law, the chair of the authorizing committee with jurisdiction over the subject matter could make an intervening motion to insist on disagreement to the amendment. While some could argue that the change protected the prerogatives of the House, others could argue that the change was a parochial protection for a specific committee. The change also allowed the motion to hold up a conference report without proposing a legislative solution. The motion would then be debated for one hour, with time divided between the proponent of the motion to insist on disagreement and a proponent of the motion to change existing law, presumably the chairs of the authorizing and Appropriations committees. The Speaker was also authorized to add Members to, and remove them from, conference committees and select committees. The House Fair Employment Practices resolution20 was codified in the rules, and changes were made in procedures of the Office of Fair Employment Practices. The permanent authorization of the Select Committee on Aging was repealed, and the temporary authorizations of three existing select committees were not renewed in the rules package, thus terminating the existence of those select committees.21 A rules change that had been endorsed by the Democratic Caucus was dropped from the proposed rules package. This change would have limited special orders (non-legislative debate normally occurring after the conclusion of a day’s legislative debate) to three hours or not later than 9:00 p.m., whichever came first. Special orders were allowed under the traditions of the House, and regulated by the Speaker’s announced policies. When the rules change was not offered, special orders continued to be regulated by the Speaker’s announced policies. Republican Critique While the majority party in the House can use its numbers to effect the chamber rules it desires, the minority party often tries to amend the rules proposed by the majority and normally critiques the proposed rules. Republicans in the 103rd Congress argued against the proposed rules on the 20 H.Res. 558, agreed to in the House October 3, 1988, and renewed in the 101st and 102nd Congresses before being incorporated into House rules in the 103rd Congress. 21 The existence of the Select Committees on Children, Youth, and Families; Hunger; and Narcotics Abuse and Control were not extended. In addition, changes in Democratic Caucus rules related to subcommittees resulted in the elimination of more than 15 subcommittees, an example of the impact of a party’s decision on the implementation of House rules. Congressional Research Service 7 A Retrospective of House Rules Changes Since the 104th Congress through 109th Congress basis of what they did and what they failed to do. Representative Gerald Solomon, as ranking Republican on the Rules Committee and Republican floor manager of the rules debate, used his opening remarks to argue that, after the events of the last Congress, voters had chosen change in the 1992 election and Democrats were misreading the voters’ message: “The American people thought last November they were voting for a change. Where is it?”22 Many of the Republican Members who spoke during debate on the rules spoke against allowing the Delegates and Resident Commissioner to vote in the Committee of the Whole. Their arguments were based on constitutional objections that only Representatives of states may be Members of the House;23 the constitutionality of the existing practice of allowing Delegates and the Resident Commissioner to vote on committees had not been established; the disparity that existed in population among the territories, Puerto Rico, and the District of Columbia and between the territories and the congressional districts; and the situation that federal income tax receipts were returned to the territories, Puerto Rico, and the District of Columbia. Some Members also argued that, practically, the votes of the Delegates and Resident Commissioner would be sought to build a majority and, politically, the change reduced the Republicans’ election gains by half since the Delegates and Resident Commissioner were all Democrats. This last point was reinforced in editorial columns representing a range of political orientation. Although other specific proposals in the rules package evoked criticism, none besides the Delegate voting was criticized so much as expanding the possible meaning of the requirement for a quorum to be physically present in committee to report out legislation. Minority Leader Robert Michel stated: a rolling quorum defeats the purpose of collective deliberation and decision making. The very word “Congress” has at its root the concept of coming together, of being together, of political community, and to institute procedures that fragment the collective sense of decision making and responsibility in the House is to demean the very concept of the Congress.24 In discussing the proposed change to this rule, Representative Bob Walker’s remarks revealed that a sense of the comity between the two parties appeared to be lacking: 22 Rep. Gerald Solomon, “Rules of the House,” Congressional Record, vol. 139, part 1 (January 5, 1993), p. 55. Several Republican Members and media editorials noted the Republicans’ 10-seat gain in the House in the 103rd Congress. Perhaps more indicative of the change that occurred in the congressional elections was the number of new Members elected—110—of whom 63 were Democrats and 47 were Republicans. 23 The Constitution states: “The House of Representatives shall be composed of Members chosen every second Year by the People of the several States, and the Electors in each State shall have the Qualifications requisite for Electors of the most numerous Branch of the State Legislature.” U.S. Const. art. I, §2, cl. 1. The Constitution also states: “No person shall be a Representative who shall not have attained to the Age of twenty five Years, and been seven Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State in which he shall be chosen.” U.S. Const. art I, §2, cl. 2. Several Republican Members challenged in court the granting of voting rights in the Committee of the Whole to Delegates and the Resident Commissioner. The court found the rule valid since the votes were rendered “meaningless” in instances where they would be decisive in a vote’s outcome. Michel v. Anderson, 817 F. Supp. 126 (D.D.C., 1993), aff’d, 14 F.3d 623 (D.C. Cir., 1994). See CRS Report RL33824, The Constitutionality of Awarding the Delegate for the District of Columbia a Vote in the House of Representatives or the Committee of the Whole, by (name redacted); and CRS Report R40170, Parliamentary Rights of the Delegates and Resident Commissioner From Puerto Rico, by (name redacted). 24 Rep. Robert Michel, “Rules of the House,” Congressional Record, vol. 139, part 1 (January 5, 1993), pp. 93-96. Congressional Research Service 8 A Retrospective of House Rules Changes Since the 104th Congress through 109th Congress Under the rolling quorum concept, what can happen is that legislation can be passed not by a committee meeting in a room and deciding that it is time to pass the legislation, but by a declaration that “what we are going to do is allow the vote to remain open until sufficient members of the committee have shown up to vote on the matter,” so literally the vote can take place over a matter of hours, over a matter of days, over a matter of weeks, over a matter of months.25 Republican Procedural Actions In addition to debate, the Republican minority did three other things during the debate on the proposed rules package. First, they prepared an extensive alternate package of rules changes (see Table 1) although they were not able to offer the alternate as an amendment once the previous question was moved on the Democratic majority’s rules resolution. Once the previous question is moved in the House, no amendments or further debate are in order.26 A number of the proposals in this alternate rules package were included in the Republicans’ 104th Congress rules resolution, and several of these proposals (or similar ones) also appeared in the Democrats’ 103rd Congress rules resolution. Second, Republicans inserted in the Congressional Record nearly 24 pages of documentation explaining and in support of their alternate rules package.27 Third, they offered two motions that provided alternative ways (to amending) to obtain votes on changes to the majority’s proposed rules package. As soon as the resolution containing the majority’s rules package was reported on the floor, Representative Gerald Solomon offered a motion to refer the resolution to a special committee to study the constitutionality of giving voting rights in the Committee of the Whole to Delegates and the Resident Commissioner. The motion was tabled on a vote of 224-176.28 At the conclusion of debate on the majority’s rules package, Representative Michel offered a motion to commit the resolution to a select committee with instructions to report back forthwith with two amendments to strike provisions related to new privileges for the Delegates and Resident Commissioner and to add a new provision of term limits of three consecutive Congresses for chairs and ranking minority Members of standing committees, effective immediately. The motion was defeated on a 187-238 vote.29 25 Rep. Bob Walker, “Changes in House Rules,” Congressional Record, vol. 139, part 1 (January 5, 1993), pp. 115-117. Mr. Walker spoke during rules debate. These remarks are from a 60-minute special order for which Mr. Walker was recognized in the evening following the debate. The complete special order appears on pp. 115-122. 26 The majority’s proposed rules package was debated in the House under the hour rule, and an additional 30 minutes was added to the debate time by unanimous consent. The previous question was ordered on a 249-176 vote, thereby eliminating the possibility of amendment. One motion to commit by the minority was in order after the previous question was ordered. 27 Rep. Gerald B. Solomon, “Rules of the House” (inserted materials), Congressional Record, vol. 139, part 1 (January 5, 1993), pp. 55-76. Rep. Solomon and other Republican Members also inserted analyses and newspaper editorials at other points in the debate. 28 Ibid., pp. 53-53. 29 Rep. Robert Michel, “Rules of the House,” Congressional Record, vol. 139, part 1 (January 5, 1993), pp. 98-99. The partisan lineup of Members at the convening of the 103rd Congress (1993-1995) was 258 Democrats, 176 Republicans, and one independent, who caucused with the Democrats. On the motion to table, all Republicans voting and 10 Democrats voted against the motion. On the motion to recommit, all Republicans voting and 14 Democrats voted for the motion. The rules package was subsequently agreed to on a 221-199 vote, with all Republicans who voted and 27 Democrats voting against it. Congressional Research Service 9 A Retrospective of House Rules Changes Since the 104th Congress through 109th Congress The Republicans’ alternate rules package was the first principal source of rules changes subsequently advanced by Republican majorities in the 104th and subsequent Congresses. Table 1. Summary of Republican Rules Package, 103rd Congress Congressional-Presidential Relations When cleared by Congress, House-originated bills are transmitted to the President within 10 calendar days Upon reading of veto message in House, the Speaker immediately puts question on reconsideration Administrative Matters At the beginning of a session of Congress, the Speaker announces the legislative program, target dates for considering major legislation, weeks in session (assuming a five-day work week), weeks of district work periods, and a target adjournment date Reprogramming of House funds is allowed only with the approval of the Speaker and minority leader Speaker provides for uniform visual broadcast coverage of House Office of Doorkeeper is abolished Chief Financial Officer of the House is established, with responsibilities for reviewing and analyzing the House’s financial operations, managing specified operations, and reporting to the Speaker, minority leader, and House Administration Committee Office of General Counsel is created, accountable to a bipartisan leadership group; House approval of a resolution is required for the general counsel to appear before a court or file a brief Members and staff on foreign travel must disclose their official itinerary Members are disallowed from sending franked mass mailings outside their districts Appropriate committees are directed to report legislation bringing the House under coverage of specific laws: National Labor Relations Act, Occupational Safety and Health Act, Equal Pay Act, Age Discrimination Act, Freedom of Information Act, Privacy Act, title VII of the Civil Rights Act, and Independent Counsel Act Committees: Organization House elects committee members within seven calendar days of Congress’s convening, and committees organize within seven calendar days of election Party ratios on committees, subcommittees, select committees, and conference committees reflect party ratios of full House, unless House rules provide otherwise House Administration Committee has an equal party ratio House Subcommittee on Legislative Appropriations has an equal party ratio Chair and majority of members of the Government Operations Committee are of the opposite party to that of the President Size of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence is reduced to 13 from 19 members, with a 7-6 majorityminority party ratio Existing select committees are abolished Committees are limited to five subcommittees, except for the Committee on Appropriations, which may have not more than 13 subcommittees, and nine major committees, which may have not more than six subcommittees: Committees on Agriculture, Armed Services, Banking, Education and Labor, Energy and Commerce, Foreign Affairs, Judiciary, Public Works, and Ways and Means No Member may serve on more than four subcommittees A three-Congress term limit is placed on committee chairs and ranking minority Members House members of the Joint Committee on the Organization of Congress are directed to request the joint committee to study and recommend committee jurisdiction realignment on functional lines and with parallel Congressional Research Service 10 A Retrospective of House Rules Changes Since the 104th Congress through 109th Congress jurisdictions between House and Senate committees and with executive departments Committees: Procedures Joint referral of measures is eliminated; Speaker may designate a committee of principal jurisdiction The majority of a committee or subcommittee constitutes its quorum to conduct business, including markup of legislation Proxy voting is banned Committee meetings may be closed only for reasons of national security or personal privacy, and only by majority roll-call vote Committee reports on measures and other matters must include the names of those voting for and against reporting; if reporting was done without a record vote, a list of Members present must appear in the report Committees: Additional Matters Committee and subcommittee prints may be released to the public by vote, with the opportunity for inclusion of minority or additional views, or they may be released without a vote but must carry a disclaimer that the document does not reflect the views of the committee or its members Oversight plans from committees for a new Congress are sent to the House Administration Committee, which reports the plans to the House by March 15 with any recommendations to ensure coordination; Speaker may appoint ad hoc oversight committees when committees share jurisdiction Prior to consideration of a committee expense resolution, the House must adopt a resolution establishing an overall ceiling on House committee staff; the Budget and Appropriations Committees are subject to same staff ceiling and committee expense resolutions The number of committee staff is reduced by 10% a year over three years The minority is entitled to up to one-third of investigative staff funds Members, officers, and employees must take an oath not to disclose classified materials Floor Procedures: Special Rules Special rules may not be considered on same calendar day as they are reported or on a subsequent calendar day of the same legislative day, except by a two-thirds vote of the House Rules Committee may not report a special rule limiting floor amendments on a measure, unless the Rules Committee chair announces to the House at least four days in advance of a committee meeting that such a rule may be reported House must agree by a two-thirds vote to consideration of a special rule that provides for automatic adoption of an amendment, bill, joint resolution, conference report, motion, or matter Rules Committee may not report a special rule disallowing amendatory instructions in a motion to recommit Floor Procedures: Suspension of the Rules Measures may be considered by suspension of the rules only by direction of the committees of jurisdiction or on request of the chair and ranking minority Member of such committees Notice that a measure will be considered by suspension of the rules is placed in the Congressional Record at least one day in advance of consideration, together with the text of any amendment No measure may be considered by suspension of the rules that authorizes or appropriates more than $50 million for a fiscal year No constitutional amendment may be considered by suspension of the rules Floor Procedures: Additional Matters Automatic roll-call votes are required for final passage of appropriations, tax, and Member pay-raise bills; conference reports; and adoption of budget resolutions and conference reports containing debt-limit increases Names of signers of discharge petitions are published in the Congressional Record once 100 signatures are obtained; updates are published weekly thereafter Congressional Research Service 11 A Retrospective of House Rules Changes Since the 104th Congress through 109th Congress Pledge of Allegiance is required as the third item in the House’s order of business Congressional Record is a verbatim account of proceedings A commemorative calendar is established Conference Matters Members are allowed three days to file supplemental, minority, or additional views in conference reports Budgetary Legislation Rules Committee reports on special rules must justify any proposed Budget Act waiver, and must contain comments on the waiver received from the Budget Committee; a separate vote could be demanded in the House on a Budget Act waiver A point of order would lie against a provision of a reconciliation bill not directly related to reconciliation instructions to reduce spending or raise revenues, as determined by the Budget Committee To consider an appropriations bill under a special rule, a three-fifths vote is required to agree to the special rule if it waives points of order against, or denies amendments to, an unauthorized or legislative provision, if such a provision had not been previously agreed to for that fiscal year by the House Committee reports on appropriations bills must include a list of unauthorized activities funded in such bills Restrictions on limitation amendments to appropriations bills are abolished Offsetting, deficit-neutral amendments may be offered en bloc to an appropriations measure Continuing appropriations measures of less than 30 days may provide only for the lesser spending amount of the House bill, Senate bill, conference report, or previous year’s appropriation; this ceiling could be waived only by a three-fifths vote Continuing appropriations of more than 30 days must carry the full text of the provisions to be enacted Prohibition on legislation and unauthorized appropriations in appropriations bills is extended to long-term continuing resolutions CBO cost estimate is required to be included in the committee report on a long-term continuing resolution Authorization measures for a fiscal year, if reported after May 15 immediately preceding the beginning of that fiscal year, may not be considered House members of the Joint Committee on Organization of Congress are directed to request that the joint committee study and make recommendations on biennial budgeting Rules and Government Operations Committees are directed to report a bill granting the President enhanced rescission authority, which would be subject to disapproval by congressional enactment Campaign Reform House Administration Committee is directed to report a campaign reform bill Source: Prepared by authors based on Republican amendment and amendment summary printed in the Congressional Record. Rep. Gerald B. Solomon, “Rules of the House” (inserted materials), Congressional Record, vol. 139, part 1 (January 5, 1993), pp. 60-69. Joint Committee on the Organization of Congress A second principal source for Republicans’ 104th Congress and subsequent rules was the recommendations of the Joint Committee on the Organization of Congress.30 30 Among the Republican House Members who served on the joint committee were Gerald Solomon and David Dreier, who was named co-vice chair of the joint committee. In the transition following the 1994 general elections, Speakerdesignate Newt Gingrich selected Representative Solomon, a House Rules Committee member, to chair the committee (continued...) Congressional Research Service 12 A Retrospective of House Rules Changes Since the 104th Congress through 109th Congress The 102nd Congress (1991-1992) created a Joint Committee on the Organization of Congress (JCOC).31 The joint committee was directed in H.Con.Res. 192 to report to the two chambers by December 31, 1993, the end of the 103rd Congress’s first session, on its work: [The joint committee shall] (1) make a full and complete study of the organization and operation of the Congress of the United States; and (2) recommend improvements in such organization and operation with a view toward strengthening the effectiveness of the Congress, simplifying its operations, improving its relationships with and oversight of other branches of the United States Government, and improving the orderly consideration of legislation.32 The study shall include an examination of—(1) the organization and operation of each House of the Congress, and the structure of, and the relationships between, the various standing, special, and select committees of the Congress; (2) the relationship between the two Houses of Congress; (3) the relationship between the Congress and the executive branch of the Government; (4) the resources and working tools available to the legislative branch as compared to those available to the executive branch; and (5) the responsibilities of the leadership, their ability to fulfill those responsibilities, and how that relates to the ability of the Senate and the House of Representatives to perform their legislative functions.33 For the House, the House subcommittee of the joint committee recommended changes affecting the breadth of House organization and operations. Many of these recommendations were mirrored in the Senate subcommittee’s recommendations for the Senate. The following is a synopsis of the House subcommittee’s recommendations, which informed the Republicans’ rules resolutions and other exercises of the House’s rulemaking authority beginning with the 104th Congress: Legislative-Executive Relations All standing House committees should be required to prepare an oversight agenda at the beginning of each Congress and to submit it to the House Administration Committee for consideration in the committee funding process. The House Administration Committee should publish these agendas and its recommendations for coordination among committees’ oversight activities. Committees should also be required to hold oversight hearings on reports concerning (...continued) in the 104th Congress. He also placed Representative Dreier, another House Rules Committee member, in charge of streamlining House committees and legislative operations; Mr. Dreier’s proposals, including those he drew from the joint committee’s recommendations, were the foundation for the rules resolution adopted for the 104th Congress. Michael Barone and Grant Ujifusa, The Almanac of American Politics 1996 (Washington, DC: National Journal Inc., 1995), p. 165; and Philip D. Duncan and Christine C. Lawrence, Politics in America 1996 (Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Inc., 1995), p. 150. 31 For additional information, see U.S. Congress, Joint Committee on the Organization of Congress, Organization of the Congress: Final Report of the House Members of the Joint Committee on the Organization of Congress, 103rd Cong., 1st sess., H.Rept. 103-413 (Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1993); and CRS Report RL31835, Reorganization of the House of Representatives: Modern Reform Efforts, by (name redacted), (name redacted), and (name redacted) , from which some information in this section was drawn. 32 Section 2(a) of H.Con.Res. 192, final action occurring in the House Aug. 6, 1992. H.Con.Res. 192 was continued in effect in the 103rd Congress by a provision in the Legislative Branch Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 1993 (P.L. 102-392, §317 (1992)). 33 Ibid., §2(b). Congressional Research Service 13 A Retrospective of House Rules Changes Since the 104th Congress through 109th Congress the executive branch, such as inspectors general’s reports. All committees should be directed to eliminate unessential executive reporting requirements. With House approval, the Speaker should be authorized to appoint ad hoc oversight committees. Although there were no specific recommendations on legislative-judicial relations, appropriate committees were encouraged to develop formal and informal means of dialogue between the two branches. Committee System Members’ committee assignments should be limited to two standing committees and four subcommittees. Waivers could be granted by the House only after recommendation of a Member’s party caucus. If enforcement of the assignment limit caused a committee to have less than half the number of Members serving on it as it had in the 103rd Congress, the Rules Committee would be directed to report a resolution abolishing the committee and transferring its jurisdiction. A Member should be allowed to serve on the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence for eight years (rather than six years), and the chair could serve an additional term if the Member named chair was in his or her final term. Except for the Committee on Appropriations, exclusive or major committees should not have more than five subcommittees. Non-major committees would be limited to four subcommittees. The Speaker would be instructed to designate a “primary” committee of jurisdiction in referring legislation, and could set time or subject-matter limits on other committees of referral after the primary committee reported a piece of legislation. Subcommittees should be prohibited from meeting when their parent committee was meeting, without the written permission of the committee chair. A week’s notice of a committee or subcommittee meeting should generally be required. Committee reports should include the rollcall vote on a motion to report or, if reporting was by voice vote, contain a list of those Members present for the voice vote. Committees should be directed to publish their committee and subcommittee attendance and voting records semiannually in the Congressional Record. Standing committees should prepare an oversight agenda at the beginning of each Congress, and report at the end of the Congress on how that agenda was fulfilled. The reports would be taken into consideration by the House Administration Committee in deliberations on committee funding. Floor Procedure A minority motion to recommit with instructions should be guaranteed. Members should also be permitted in debate to make references to certain actions taken by the Senate or its committees that were a matter of public record. The House should have a four-day legislative week, and specific times would be set aside only for floor proceedings or only for committee meetings. The Congressional Record should be a substantially verbatim transcript of House proceedings. The House parliamentarian should be directed to prepare a recodification of House rules. Congressional Research Service 14 A Retrospective of House Rules Changes Since the 104th Congress through 109th Congress Budgetary Legislation Congress should establish a two-year budget cycle for presidential budget submissions, budget resolutions, multiyear authorizations, and appropriations. A budget resolution and appropriations bills would be considered in the first year of the two-year cycle, and multiyear authorizations and committee oversight would occur in the second year. The Appropriations Committee should be required to notify appropriate committees of jurisdiction whenever it reported a measure containing unauthorized appropriations or legislative provisions. A point of order would lie against an appropriation in excess of an authorization level set by the House. Budget resolutions should include a statement on total tax expenditures attributable to special provisions of the tax code. Committee reports on tax bills, and joint explanatory statements to conference reports on tax bills, should list tax expenditures, and committee reports on appropriations bills, and joint explanatory statements to conference reports on appropriations bills, and authorization bills should list earmark provisions. To gain better control over entitlement spending, a new process should be established that requires the President to submit targets for direct spending and to make recommendations for reaching the targets in the event they will be exceeded. Ethics Process The Committee on Standards of Official Conduct (the “Ethics Committee”) should be allowed to use a panel of private citizens as fact finders to investigate complaints against Members and to report to the committee any formal charges of violations. Staffing and Support Agencies A Speaker task force should be appointed to study the legislative branch to achieve cost savings consistent with reductions implemented in the executive branch under the National Performance Review. Eight-year authorizations should be imposed on the Congressional Budget Office, Congressional Research Service, General Accounting Office (now the Government Accountability Office34), Office of Technology Assessment,35 and Government Printing Office. Appropriate committees should study means to better coordinate nonpartisan services in the legislative branch and 34 For a history and explanation of the name change, see the Government Accountability Office’s website, at http://gao.gov/about/namechange.html. 35 Congress did not fund the continuation of the Office of Technology Assessment (OTA) in FY1996. The House Appropriations Committee did not include funding in H.R. 1854, the fiscal 1996 appropriation bill for the legislative branch, and an amendment to restore funding was defeated on the House floor. “Legislative Branch Appropriations Act, 1996,” Congressional Record, vol. 141, part 12 (June 21, 1995), pp. 16677-16683. The Senate Appropriations Committee reported H.R. 1854 with only termination funds for OTA. An amendment to restore funding was defeated on the Senate floor. “Legislative Branch Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 1996,” Congressional Record, vol. 141, part 14 (July 20, 1995), pp. 19635-19640, 19641-19647, and 19661. As sent to the President, H.R. 1854 contained termination funding. After President Clinton vetoed H.R. 1854, Congress sent to the President H.R. 2492, which contained only termination funding for OTA (P.L. 104-53, 109 Stat. 514, 526 (1995)). Congressional Research Service 15 A Retrospective of House Rules Changes Since the 104th Congress through 109th Congress minimize duplication, and should assess the feasibility of opening such services to competitive bidding by the private sector. Appropriate committees should report on the feasibility of granting to private firms by competitive bid the right to operate certain congressional facilities, including the barber and beauty shops, gymnasium, health and medical services, restaurants, and child care facilities. A bicameral “office of compliance” should be created to study how to apply labor laws to Congress, and to issue regulations applying those laws to Congress, effective on House and Senate approval of a concurrent resolution. The office should also establish administrative enforcement mechanisms, using independent hearing officers and providing recourse to federal appellate review. The House Administration Committee should be given a goal of creating professional development programs for congressional employees. Appropriate House and Senate committees should study staff salaries and take steps to achieve greater parity between the chambers. Information Technology The Joint Committees on the Library and on Printing should be abolished, and their functions should be transferred to a Joint Committee on Information Management, which would oversee information management for Congress. Public Understanding To foster public understanding of Congress and the legislative process, the House should undertake different activities such as experimenting with alternative forms of debate, such as Oxford Union-style debates; encourage the creation of a congressional education center; and enhance orientation programs for journalists covering Congress. Legislative information should be more readily available to Members, the public, and the media, and bills, committee reports, conference reports, and amendments (to bills to be considered under suspension of the rules) should be available for review at least 24 hours before consideration. Action on the JCOC Recommendations in the 103rd Congress Legislation embodying the JCOC’s recommendations was introduced in the 103rd Congress (H.R. 3801 and S. 1824), but no action was taken on these measures. The House, however, passed H.R. 4822, the Congressional Accountability Act, which the Senate did not act on. In explication of recommendations of the joint committee, this bill would have applied certain federal labor laws to Congress, established an Office of Congressional Fair Employment Practices, provided a dispute resolution process, and established a procedures for Congress to consider rules proposed by the new office’s board. The House also agreed to H.Res. 578, establishing an Office of Compliance and effecting other recommendations related to the applicability of labor laws to Congress.36 The House and Senate also came close to passing new lobby laws and gift rules (S. 349, H.Rept. 103-75), but, while the House agreed to the conference report on the measure, Senate consideration ended when the Senate failed to invoke cloture on the conference report. 36 H.Res. 578, agreed to in the House October 7, 1994. Congressional Research Service 16 A Retrospective of House Rules Changes Since the 104th Congress through 109th Congress Contract with America As part of the campaign preceding the 1994 elections, most Republican candidates for U.S. Representative signed the Contract with America, a campaign platform for institutional change and priority legislation, should Republicans become the majority party in the House in the 104th Congress. The provisions of the platform that related to Congress as an institution were as follows: On the first day of the 104th Congress, the new Republican majority will immediately pass the following major reforms, aimed at restoring the faith and trust of the American people in their government: First, require all laws that apply to the rest of the country also apply equally to the Congress; Second, select a major, independent auditing firm to conduct a comprehensive audit of Congress for waste, fraud or abuse; Third, cut the number of House committees, and cut committee staff by one-third; Fourth, limit the terms of all committee chairs; Fifth, ban the casting of proxy votes in committee; Sixth, require committee meetings to be open to the public; Seventh, require a three-fifths majority vote to pass a tax increase; Eighth, guarantee an honest accounting of our Federal Budget by implementing zero baseline budgeting.37 The Contract with America was the third principal source for changes to House rules in the 104th Congress. These eight planks were the basis for the eight sections of title I of H.Res. 6, agreed to in the House January 4, 1995. Recodification of House Rules, 106th Congress The recodification of House rules was a recommendation of the Joint Committee on the Organization of Congress. A brief explanation is included here in this report since references to the numbers and clauses of rules in succeeding sections are to the recodified rules. With the Speaker’s approval, the Rules Committee established a task force on recodification at the committee’s organizational meeting for the 105th Congress. House rules had last been comprehensively recodified in the 1880s. Fifty-one rules were collapsed to twenty-eight, without substantive change but with deletion of obsolete provisions. The recodification sought to use consistent language, to cluster together like provisions, and to retain rules numbers long associated with certain procedures.38 The Rules Committee presented its recommendations to 37 The text of the Contract with America can be found at http://www.house.gov/house/Contract/CONTRACT.html. A separate order allowed the majority and minority leaders, or their designees, to insert materials in the (continued...) 38 Congressional Research Service 17 A Retrospective of House Rules Changes Since the 104th Congress through 109th Congress House leaders, chairs, and ranking minority Members in October 1998.39 The proposed recodification was adopted when the House adopted its rules for the 106th Congress on January 6, 1999.40 The parliamentarian’s notes in the House Rules and Manual, attached to specific rules, clauses, or paragraphs, trace the recodification of specific provisions of House rules, in addition to changes to the text of the rules. Therefore, citations appearing in the balance of this report are only to the recodified rules, and only to a clause of a rule at the time a change was made. Cross references to House rules prior to recodification may be found in the parliamentarian’s notes or through Table 2, and changes following recodification to the numbering of clauses, paragraphs, and subparagraphs may be found in the parliamentarian’s notes. Table 2. Structure of House Rules before and after Recodification Structure of 105th Congress Compared with 106th Congress Rules Subject Former Rule Number(s) Recodified Rule Number Speaker Rule I Rule I House Officers and Officials Rules II, III, IV, V, VI, VII Rule II Members of Congress Rules VIII, XII Rule III Hall of the House Rules XXXI, XXXII, XXXIII Rule IV Broadcasting the House Rule I Rule V Official reporters, media galleries Rule XXXIV Rule VI Records of the House Rule XXXVI, XXXVII Rule VII Response to Subpoenas Rule L Rule VIII Questions of Privilege Rule IX Rule IX Organization of Committees Rules X, XI, XLVIII Rule X Procedures of Committees Rules XI, X, XXXV Rule XI Referral of Measures Rules X, XXII, XXXIX Rule XII Reports of Committees Rules XI, XIII Rule XIII Order of Business Rule XXIV Rule XIV Special Days Rules XXVII, XXIV Rule XV Motions and Amendments Rule XVI Rule XVI Decorum and Debate Rules XIV, XXIX, XXX Rule XVII Committee of the Whole Rule XVIII Rule XXIII Motions after Amendment Stage Rule XVII Rule XIX Voting and Quorum Calls Rules XVI, I, XXXVIII Rule XX (...continued) Congressional Record that they considered legislative history pertinent to the recodification. H.Res. 5, §2(e) (106th Cong.), agreed to in the House January 6, 1999. 39 U.S. House, Committee on Rules, Survey of Activities of the House Committee on Rules, 105th Congress, 105th Cong., 2nd sess., H.Rept. 105-840 (Washington, DC: GPO, 1999), pp. 51-52. 40 “Rules of the House,” Congressional Record, vol. 145, part 1 (January 6, 1999), pp. 47-235. Congressional Research Service 18 A Retrospective of House Rules Changes Since the 104th Congress through 109th Congress Subject Former Rule Number(s) Recodified Rule Number Restrictions on Certain Bills Rule XXI Rule XXI House-Senate Relations Rule XX, XXVIII Rule XXII Statutory Public Debt Limit Rule XLIX Rule XXIII Code of Official Conduct Rule XLIII Rule XXIV Use of Official Funds Rules XLV, XLVI Rule XXV Outside Earned Income, Gifts Rules XLVII, LI Rule XXVI Financial Disclosure Rule XLIV Rule XXVII General Provisions Rule XLII Rule XXVIII Source: Prepared by authors of this report, based in part on Rep. David Dreier, “Major Rule Citation Changes Pursuant to the Recodification of the Rules of the House” (table) in “Rules of the House,” Congressional Record, vol. 145, part 1 (January 6, 1999), pp. 82-83. Notes: The subject column lists the subject of the recodified rules, in numerical order. Individual prerecodification rules might have covered several subjects; the column Former Rule Number(s) lists principal sources for a recodified rule, not the source of every provision of a recodified rule. A table showing the recodification of specific text, with commentary on changes, appears at Rep. David Dreier, “Rules of the House,” Congressional Record, vol. 145, part 1 (January 6, 1999), pp. 84-223. Rules Changes Affecting Committees Surveys and hearings conducted by the Joint Committee on the Organization of Congress showed that Members and staff, in overwhelming numbers, ranked committee structure and other matters involving committees to be among their greatest concerns.41 The House had previously made extensive changes to committee organization or procedures or both in the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946, the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1970, the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974, the Committee Reform Amendments of 1974, and a 1980 resolution realigning committee jurisdiction over energy.42 Incremental changes to committee organization and procedures had been made in biennial rules resolutions, and, as noted above, decisions in the Democratic-controlled House in the 103rd Congress eliminated four select committees. Changes to the committee system made in rules resolutions in the 104th Congress and subsequently addressed most aspects of the committee system. The following section identifies changes made to the committee system on the opening day of each Congress since the 104th Congress in resolutions adopting the rules of the House and establishing special orders, and pursuant to the Speakers’ announcements. The section is organized around three central themes: 41 U.S. Congress, Joint Committee on the Organization of Congress, Organization of the Congress: Final Report of the House Members of the Joint Committee on the Organization of Congress, 103rd Cong., 1st sess., H.Rept. 103-413 (Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1993), p. 23. 42 Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946, 60 Stat. 812 (1946); Legislative Reorganization Act of 1970, 84 Stat. 1140 (1970); Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974, 88 Stat. 287 (1974); the Committee Reform Amendments of 1974, H.Res. 988, agreed to in the House October 8, 1974; and energy jurisdiction realignment, H.Res. 549, agreed to in the House March 25, 1980. For a detailed history of House reform efforts since 1946, see CRS Report RL31835, Reorganization of the House of Representatives: Modern Reform Efforts, by (name redacted), (name redacted) , and (name redacted). Congressional Research Service 19 A Retrospective of House Rules Changes Since the 104th Congress through 109th Congress (1) structure and organization, including committee chairmanships and committee assignments, committee jurisdiction, and subcommittees; (2) procedure, including committee hearings and meetings, committee reports, referral, and oversight; and (3) staff and funding.43 Structure and Organization Assignments and Size General Assignment Rules44 H.Res. 6, agreed to in the 104th Congress, prohibited Members from serving on more than two standing committees and four subcommittees of standing committees, with exceptions approved by the House upon recommendation of the respective party caucus or conference. House rules had been silent on assignment limitations.45 A subcommittee was defined as a unit of a committee set up for at least six months; a special oversight subcommittee of the National Security Committee was exempted from this definition. Ex officio service by a chair or ranking minority Member on their committee’s subcommittees was not included in the limit. H.Res. 6 also authorized the Speaker, with the approval of the House, to appoint ad hoc oversight committees to review matters within the jurisdiction of two or more standing committees. The change was one of several made in House rules to enhance and coordinate House committee oversight. A House rule previously provided this authority to the Speaker only when the House approved creation of an ad hoc committee with legislative authority or, generally, a select committee. Budget Committee46 H.Res. 6 in the 104th Congress changed the permissible duration of Members’ service on the Budget Committee to four Congresses in six Congresses from three Congresses in five Congresses. 43 For additional information on rules changes affecting committees made at the beginning of each Congress, see CRS Report 95-187, Committee System: Rules Changes in the House, 104th Congress, by (name redacted); CRS Report 97-138, Committee System: Rules Changes in the House, 105th Congress, by (name redacted); CRS Report RS20017, Committee System Rules Changes in the House, 106th Congress, by (name redacted); CRS Report RS20769, Committee System Rules Changes in the House, 107th Congress, by (name redacted); CRS Report RS21382, Committee System Rules Changes in the House, 108th Congress, by (name redacted); and CRS Report RS22018, Committee System Rules Changes in the House, 109th Congress, by (name redacted). 44 For additional information, see CRS Report 98-367, House Committees: Assignment Process, by (name redacted), and CRS Report 98-151, House Committees: Categories and Rules for Committee Assignments, by (name redacted). 45 For background on House committee sizes and assignments, see CRS Report R41501, House Legislative Procedures and House Committee Organization: Options for Change in the 112th Congress, by (name redacted) and (name redac ted). 46 For background on the Budget Committee, see CRS Report R40774, Committee on the Budget in the House of Representatives: Structure and Responsibilities, by Megan Suzanne Lynch. Congressional Research Service 20 A Retrospective of House Rules Changes Since the 104th Congress through 109th Congress In the 106th Congress, the prohibition of service on the Budget Committee for more than four Congresses in any six successive Congresses was waived during the 106th Congress by a separate order in H.Res. 5. In the 108th Congress, H.Res. 5 provided that the Budget Committee’s membership would include one member from the Rules Committee, codifying a decision made in the Republican Conference’s early organization meetings. (Amended clause 5 of Rule X.) H.Res. 5 in the 109th Congress contained a provision that one member of the majority party and one member of the minority party were to be “designated” by the respective elected leaderships as members of the Budget Committee. The rule that was amended had previously required the members to be “from” the elected leaderships. (Amended clause 5 of Rule X.) Ethics Committee47 In the 106th Congress, H.Res. 5 eliminated the requirement that four members (two from each party) of the Standards of Official Conduct Committee (the “Ethics Committee”) rotate off the panel every Congress,48 and changed service on the committee to three Congresses in any five Congresses from two Congresses in any three Congresses. The size of the committee was also set at 10 members, 5 of each party.49 (Amended clause 5 of Rule X.) Intelligence Committee50 Membership on the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence was changed by H.Res. 6 in the 104th Congress to four terms from three in six successive Congresses, while the chair and ranking minority Member were allowed to serve a fifth term. The Speaker was also designated as an ex officio member of the committee in place of the majority leader; the minority leader continued as an ex officio member. The size of the Intelligence Committee was also decreased to 16 members (from 19), with a limit of not more than 9 members from one party. In the 107th Congress, H.Res. 5 increased the size of the Intelligence Committee to not more than 18 members (from not more than 16 members), of which not more than 10 could be from the same party.51 (Amended clause 11(a)(1) of Rule X.) 47 For background on the Ethics Committee, see CRS Report 98-15, House Committee on Ethics: A Brief History of Its Evolution and Jurisdiction, by (name redacted). 48 Established previously by Section 2 of H.Res. 168 (105th Cong.), agreed to in the House September 18, 1997. This resolution (in Section 1) was also the source of a provision of Rule X, clause 5(a), directing the Speaker and minority leader to each designate 10 Members, not assigned to the Ethics Committee, to serve on investigative subcommittees of the Ethics Committee. 49 While 10 members (5 of each party) was the size of the committee in the previous, 105th Congress, the Ethics Reform Act of 1989 had established the size of the committee at 14, with 7 members of each party. P.L. 101-194, §803(b); 103 Stat. 1716, 1774 (1989). As an exercise in congressional rulemaking authority, the House could change the size in law by a later rule, by a rules change, by a special order, or by simply electing a specific number of members to the committee. 50 For background on the Intelligence Committee, see CRS Report RL32525, Congressional Oversight of Intelligence: Current Structure and Alternatives, by (name redacted). 51 In the 107th and 109th Congresses, the House again changed the size of the Intelligence Committee. On January 6, 2001, the House by unanimous consent agreed to an order to set the size of the committee at 20, with not more than 11 members from one party. Rep. Porter Goss, “Composition of Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence,” (continued...) Congressional Research Service 21 A Retrospective of House Rules Changes Since the 104th Congress through 109th Congress Chairmanships/Term Limitations52 Pursuant to H.Res. 6, effective with the 104th Congress, committee and subcommittee chairs were limited to serve as chair to not more than three terms in three consecutive Congresses. The resolution also permitted any majority member, not the senior most ranking majority Member, to be designated as the vice-chair of a committee or subcommittee.53 H.Res. 6 also allowed a chair or ranking minority Member of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence who had served just one term to be reappointed to serve an additional term if he or she had already completed the term limit of four Congresses on the committee. In the 108th Congress, H.Res. 5 abolished the term limit for service as chair or ranking minority Member of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. (Amended clause 11 of Rule X.) The term limit for service as chair or ranking minority Member of the Budget Committee was codified to six years, equal to the term limitation for other standing committee chairs. (Amended clause 5 of Rule X.) H.Res. 5 in the 109th Congress authorized the chair of the Rules Committee to serve as chair notwithstanding the rule limiting service of committee chairs to three consecutive terms. (Amended clause 5 of Rule X.) Committee Abolition The Committee on the District of Columbia, the Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries, and the Committee on Post Office and Civil Service were abolished pursuant to H.Res. 6 in the 104th Congress. (See “Jurisdiction” below for explanation of the distribution of the committees’ jurisdiction.) Committee Creation and Retention54 (See also “Jurisdiction” below.) H.Res. 6 also authorized the Speaker, with the approval of the House, to appoint ad hoc oversight committees to review matters within the jurisdiction of two or more standing committees. The change was one of several made in House rules to enhance and coordinate House committee oversight. A House rule previously provided this authority to the Speaker only when the House (...continued) Congressional Record, vol. 147, part 1 (January 6, 2001), p. 115. H.Res. 51 (109th Cong.), agreed to in the House January 26, 2005, set the membership at 21, of which not more than 12 members could be from the same party. 52 For additional information on chairs and ranking minority Members, see CRS Report RS21165, House Standing Committee Chairs and Ranking Minority Members: Rules Governing Selection Procedures, by (name redacted). 53 In seeking to fulfill another provision of the Contract with America, Republicans brought congressional term limit proposals to the floor. The House voted twice, once in the 104th Congress and once in the 105th Congress, on a constitutional amendment imposing term limits on service in Congress. A two-thirds vote is required to propose an amendment to the Constitution, and both votes fell short. See H.J.Res. 73 (104th Cong.), failed passage 227-204, March 29, 1995, and H.J.Res. 2 (105th Cong.), failed passage 217-211, February 12, 1997. 54 For background information on types of House committees, see CRS Report 98-241, Committee Types and Roles, by (name redacted). Congressional Research Service 22 A Retrospective of House Rules Changes Since the 104th Congress through 109th Congress approved creation of an ad hoc committee with legislative authority or, generally, a select committee. A rules change in H.Res. 5 in the 105th Congress extended until January 21, 1997, the existence of a Select Committee on Ethics (comprising members of the Standards of Official Conduct Committee in the 104th Congress), to allow committee members to complete their work and make any recommendations to the House related to the official conduct of Speaker Newt Gingrich.55 H.Res. 5 in the 106th Congress contained a separate order continuing until March 31, 1999, the existence of the Select Committee on U.S. National Security and Military/Commercial Concerns with the People’s Republic of China.56 H.Res. 5 in the 108th Congress created a Select Committee on Homeland Security for one Congress’s duration with legislative jurisdiction to develop recommendations and report to the House on matters relating to the Homeland Security Act of 2002.57 The select committee was also charged with conducting a study of committee jurisdiction over the issue of homeland security and reporting any recommended changes to the House by September 30, 2004.58 H.Res. 5 in the 109th Congress created a permanent, standing Committee on Homeland Security with legislative and oversight jurisdiction. The new panel was granted legislative jurisdiction over the following: (1) Overall homeland security policy. (2) Organization and administration of the Department of Homeland Security. (3) Functions of the Department of Homeland Security related to the following: (A) Border and port security (except immigration policy and non-border enforcement; (B) Customs (except customs revenue); (C) Integration, analysis, and dissemination of homeland security information; 55 For background, see “Gingrich Weakened by Ethics Case,” Congressional Quarterly Almanac, 1997, vol. LIII (Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Inc., 1998), pp. 1-11–1-15. 56 Established by H.Res. 463 (105th Cong.), agreed to in the House June 18, 1998. The separate order in H.Res. 5 (106th Cong.) contained restrictions on certain provisions of H.Res. 463. The life of the select committee was ultimately extended to May 31, 1999. H.Res. 129, agreed to in the House March 24, 1999; H.Res. 153, agreed to in the House April 29, 1999; and H.Res. 170, agreed to in the House May 13, 1999. For background, see Chuck McCutcheon, “With Cox Report’s Release, Struggle for Consensus Begins,” CQ Weekly, vol. 57, no. 22, May 29, 1999, pp. 1251-1254. 57 116 Stat. 2135. 58 The select committee’s letter of transmittal, report, and supplementary materials on proposed committee jurisdictional changes are available at http://web.archive.org/web/20041023103612/http://hsc.house.gov/files/ mini_report_sigs.pdf. In the 107th Congress, in response the President George W. Bush’s proposal to create the Department of Homeland Security, the House created a Select Committee on Homeland Security to receive proposed legislation on the department’s creation from a number of standing committees and to “develop recommendations and report to the House on such matters that relate to the establishment of a department of homeland security as may be referred to it by the Speaker.” H.Res. 449, agreed to in the House June 19, 2002. The existence of that select committee expired with the adjournment of the 107th Congress. Congressional Research Service 23 A Retrospective of House Rules Changes Since the 104th Congress through 109th Congress (D) Domestic preparedness for and collective response to terrorism; (E) Research and development; and (F) Transportation security.”59 The new committee was granted oversight authority over homeland security, including the “interaction of all departments and agencies with the Department of Homeland Security.” (Amended clauses 1 and 3 of Rule X.) In addition, in his announced policies for the 109th Congress, the Speaker stated that referrals to the Select Committee on Homeland Security would not constitute precedent for referrals to the permanent committee.60 (See “Jurisdiction” below in this section for concomitant changes in other committees’ jurisdiction.) Committee Names (Name changes are made as amendments to Rule X, with any needed conforming changes made in other rules.) Several committees were given new names under H.Res. 6 for the 104th Congress: • Banking and Financial Services (formerly Banking, Finance, and Urban Affairs); • Commerce (formerly Energy and Commerce); • Economic and Educational Opportunities (formerly Education and Labor); • Government Reform and Oversight (formerly Government Operations); • House Oversight (formerly House Administration); • International Relations (formerly Foreign Affairs); • National Security (formerly Armed Services); • Resources (formerly Natural Resources); • Science (formerly Science, Space, and Technology); and • Transportation and Infrastructure (formerly Public Works and Transportation). 59 For background and analysis on the creation and existence of the Homeland Security Committee, see CRS Report RL32711, Homeland Security: Compendium of Recommendations Relevant to House Committee Organization and Analysis of Considerations for the House, and 109th and 110th Congresses Epilogue, by (name redacted); and CRS Report RL33061, Homeland Security and House Committees: Analysis of 109th Congress Jurisdiction Changes and Their Impact on the Referral of Legislation, by (name redacted) and (name redacted). The House Appropriations Committee reorganized its subcommittees in the 108th Congress and the 109th Congress. In the 108th Congress, it created a Homeland Security Subcommittee, and changed the jurisdiction of other subcommittees while retaining a total of 13 subcommittees. U.S. House, Committee on Appropriations, “Chairman Young Announces Homeland Security Reorganization,” news release, January 29, 2003. In the 109th Congress, it reorganized its subcommittees and reduced their number to 10. U.S. House, Committee on Appropriations, “Chairman Lewis Announces Major Reorganization of the House Appropriations Committee and Slate of Subcommittee Chairmen,” news release, February 9, 2005. See also CRS Report RL31572, Appropriations Subcommittee Structure: History of Changes from 1920-2011, by (name redacted). 60 “Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore,” Congressional Record, vol. 151, part 1 (January 4, 2005), p. 71. Congressional Research Service 24 A Retrospective of House Rules Changes Since the 104th Congress through 109th Congress In the following 105th Congress, H.Res. 5 changed the name of the Committee on Economic and Educational Opportunities to the Committee on Education and the Workforce. In the 106th Congress, pursuant to H.Res. 5, the name of the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight was changed to the Committee on Government Reform; the Committee on House Oversight was returned to the Committee on House Administration; and the Committee on National Security was returned to the Committee on Armed Services. H.Res. 5 of the 107th Congress changed the name of the Committee on Commerce to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. Further, the resolution reconstituted the Committee on Banking and Financial Services as the Committee on Financial Services. (See “Jurisdiction,” next below, for an explanation on the realignment of these two committees’ jurisdiction.) Jurisdiction61 (See also “Committee Creation and Retention” above and “Referral” below.) 104th Congress H.Res. 6 transferred jurisdiction from the District of Columbia Committee and the Post Office and Civil Service Committee (both abolished by the resolution) to the Government Reform and Oversight Committee. The Post Office Committee’s jurisdiction over the Franking Commission was transferred to the House Oversight Committee. Specific jurisdiction over paperwork reduction and over public information and records was added to the Government Reform Committee’s jurisdiction, and the committee was given specific responsibility for coordinating House committees’ oversight plans. The House Oversight Committee’s jurisdiction over the erection of monuments to the memory of individuals was transferred to the Resources Committee. Also abolished was the Merchant Marine and Fisheries Committee. Its jurisdiction was dispersed among several panels: • the Merchant Marine Academy, the national security aspects of merchant marine, and interoceanic canals were transferred to the National Security Committee; • marine research was transferred to the Science Committee; • the Coast Guard, navigation, vessel registration, prevention of collisions at sea, non-national security aspects of merchant marine, and pollution of navigable waters were transferred to the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee; and • fisheries, marine affairs except pollution of navigable waters, oceanographic affairs, and endangered species were transferred to the Resources Committee. An addition for purposes of clarification was also made to the National Security Committee’s jurisdiction, for intelligence-related activities of the Department of Defense. An addition was 61 For additional information on jurisdiction, see CRS Report 98-175, House Committee Jurisdiction and Referral: Rules and Practice, by (name redacted). Congressional Research Service 25 A Retrospective of House Rules Changes Since the 104th Congress through 109th Congress made to the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee’s jurisdiction over federal management of emergencies and natural disasters. Changes affected a sizable portion of the Commerce Committee’s jurisdiction: • primary jurisdiction over Glass-Steagall reform legislation was given to the Banking and Financial Services Committee; • food inspection was consolidated in the Agriculture Committee with the addition of the inspection of poultry, seafood, and seafood products; • railroads and inland waterways were absorbed by the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee; • the Trans-Alaska Pipeline (except ratemaking) was transferred to the Resources Committee; and • the commercial application of energy technology was moved to the Science Committee, consolidating its jurisdiction over energy research and development. The Commerce Committee gained from the Resources Committee jurisdiction over regulation of the domestic nuclear energy industry, and a conforming change was made in the committee’s oversight jurisdiction. H.Res. 6 also added specific water conservation jurisdiction for the Agriculture Committee. It added specific jurisdiction for the Banking Committee over economic stabilization, defense production, and financial aid to commerce and industry. It added small business jurisdiction related to regulatory flexibility and paperwork reduction to the jurisdiction of the Small Business Committee. H.Res. 6 also expanded the Budget Committee’s jurisdiction to include “Measures relating to the congressional budget process, generally” and “Measures relating to the establishment, extension, and enforcement of special controls over the Federal budget, including the budgetary treatment of off-budget Federal agencies and measures providing exemption from reduction under any order issued under part C of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.” A paragraph of the committee’s jurisdiction regarding concurrent budget resolutions and matters under titles III and IV of the Congressional Budget Act was amended to add: “and other measures setting forth appropriate levels of budget totals for the United States Government.”62 The Judiciary Committee’s jurisdiction was clarified with the specific addition of “judiciary” and “administrative practice and procedure” to its jurisdiction. H.Res. 6 also amended the jurisdiction of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence to reflect previous referral decisions. 62 The section-by-section analysis of H.Res. 6 indicated that the Budget Committee “would gain jurisdiction over budgetary legislation from the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight.” Rep. Gerald Solomon, “Section-bySection Analysis of House Rules Resolution,” Congressional Record, vol. 141, part 1 (January 4, 1995), p. 474. See also jurisdictional understandings inserted in the Congressional Record: Rep. Richard Armey, Congressional Record, vol. 141, part 1 (January 4, 1995), pp. 483-484; and Rep. John Kasich, “Rules Package/Memorandum of Understanding,” Congressional Record, vol. 141, part 1 (January 4, 1995), pp. 617-618. Memoranda of understanding or other announcements can explain the meaning of jurisdictional changes or the settlement of a jurisdictional disagreement. Congressional Research Service 26 A Retrospective of House Rules Changes Since the 104th Congress through 109th Congress 105th Congress In the 105th Congress, H.Res. 5 revised the jurisdictions of the Budget and Government Reform and Oversight Committees. The Budget Committee was given oversight over the “budget process” rather than over solely the “congressional budget process.” The Government Reform Committee was given jurisdiction over “government management and accounting measures, generally” rather than “budget and accounting measures, generally.” 107th Congress H.Res. 5 in the 107th Congress transferred jurisdiction over securities and exchanges, and insurance generally, to the Committee on Financial Services from the Committee on Energy and Commerce.63 (Amended clause 1 of Rule X.) In addition, the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence gained exclusive oversight responsibility over the sources and methods of the core intelligence agencies. (Amended clause 3 of Rule X.) The resolution transferred, to the clerk of the House, the House Administration Committee’s responsibilities to examine House-passed bills, joint resolutions, amendments, and enrolled bills and joint resolutions, and to present enrolled bills and joint resolutions to the President. In cooperation with the Senate, the clerk now examines bills and joint resolutions passed by both houses to ensure their correct enrollment, and presents enrolled bills and joint resolutions originated in the House to the President, after obtaining the signatures of the Speaker and the President of the Senate. The clerk then reports to the House the fact and date of a measure’s presentment to the President. (Amending clause 2(d) of Rule II, and clause 4(d)(1) of Rule X.) 108th Congress H.Res. 5 in the 108th Congress created a Select Committee on Homeland Security for one Congress’s duration with legislative jurisdiction to develop recommendations and report to the House on matters relating to the Homeland Security Act of 2002.64 The select committee was also charged with conducting a study of committee jurisdiction over the issue of homeland security and reporting any recommended changes to the House by September 30, 2004.65 63 Memoranda of understanding, Speakers’ announcements, and decisions of the House can explain the meaning of jurisdictional changes and the settlement of jurisdictional disagreements. For explanation of the jurisdictions of the Energy and Commerce Committee and the Financial Services Committee, see Speaker Dennis Hastert, “Memorandum of Understanding between Energy and Commerce Committee and Financial Services Committee,” Congressional Record, vol. 147, part 1 (January 20, 2001), p. 163. 64 116 Stat. 2135. 65 The select committee’s letter of transmittal, report, and supplementary materials on proposed committee jurisdictional changes are available at http://web.archive.org/web/20041023103612/http://hsc.house.gov/files/ mini_report_sigs.pdf. In the 107th Congress, in response the President George W. Bush’s proposal to create the Department of Homeland Security, the House created a Select Committee on Homeland Security to receive proposed legislation on the department’s creation from a number of standing committees and to “develop recommendations and report to the House on such matters that relate to the establishment of a department of homeland security as may be referred to it by the Speaker.” H.Res. 449, agreed to in the House June 19, 2002. The existence of that select committee expired with the adjournment of the 107th Congress. Congressional Research Service 27 A Retrospective of House Rules Changes Since the 104th Congress through 109th Congress 109th Congress H.Res. 5 in the 109th Congress transferred jurisdiction of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure over transportation security and port security to the Committee on Homeland Security, but the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee retained jurisdiction over the Coast Guard as an agency and over many of its programs and activities and over transportation safety. The resolution also transferred jurisdiction over domestic preparedness for terrorist acts to the Committee on Homeland Security, but the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee retained jurisdiction over natural disasters and other emergencies. Further, the resolution transferred the Judiciary Committee’s jurisdiction over border security to the Committee on Homeland Security, but the Judiciary Committee retained jurisdiction over immigration and over non-border related policy. The resolution also specifically added “criminal law enforcement” to the jurisdiction of the Judiciary Committee. The resolution transferred jurisdiction over the Customs Service to the Committee on Homeland Security, although the Committee on Ways and Means retained jurisdiction over customs revenue.66 (Amended clause 1 of Rule X.) (See “Committee Creation and Retention” above for the jurisdiction of the Select Committee on Homeland Security that existed in the 108th Congress and the jurisdiction of the permanent Homeland Security Committee established in the 109th Congress.) In addition, the Speaker in his announced policies for the 109th Congress indicated that the referral of measures to the Select Committee on Homeland Security of the 108th Congress would not constitute precedent for referrals to the standing Committee on Homeland Security.67 The Speaker’s announced policies also addressed the January 20, 2001, “Memorandum of Understanding Between Energy and Commerce Committee and Financial Services Committee,” regarding the jurisdictions of the two committees. The Speaker announced that the final two paragraphs of the memorandum dealing with electronic commerce, anti-fraud authorities under securities laws, and the setting of accounting standards by the Financial Accounting Standards Board would no longer provide jurisdictional guidance.68 Subcommittees69 H.Res. 6 in the 104th Congress prohibited any committee from having more than five subcommittees, except for Appropriations (13 subcommittees), Government Reform and Oversight (7), and Transportation and Infrastructure (6). In the 106th Congress, H.Res. 5 maintained the existing rule restriction regarding the limitation of five subcommittees; however, committees that maintained an oversight subcommittee were restricted to no more than six subcommittees. H.Res. 5 also deleted the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure from the exemption to the five subcommittees plus an oversight 66 For a detailed explanation seeking to differentiate the homeland security jurisdictions of the Committee on Homeland Security and that of 10 standing committees, see Rep. David Dreier, “Legislative History to Accompany Changes to Rule X,” Congressional Record, vol. 151, part 1 (January 4, 2005), pp. 60-61. 67 “Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore,” Congressional Record, vol. 151, part 1 (January 4, 2005), pp. 69-71. 68 Ibid. 69 For additional information on subcommittees, see CRS Report 98-544, Subcommittees in the House of Representatives, by (name redacted), and CRS Report 98-610,House Subcommittees: Assignment Process, by (name redacted). Congressional Research Service 28 A Retrospective of House Rules Changes Since the 104th Congress through 109th Congress subcommittee. (Amended clause 5 of Rule X.) Further, the Committee on Government Reform, in order to maintain a Census Subcommittee, was allowed by a separate order in the rules resolution to have eight subcommittees for the 106th Congress. H.Res. 5 in the 107th Congress maintained the rule regarding the number of subcommittees each committee could create. However, by separate order in the rules resolution, the Committee on Government Reform was allowed to create up to eight subcommittees and the Committee on International Relations and the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure were allowed to create up to six subcommittees each. The 108th Congress’s H.Res. 5 also maintained the existing rule on subcommittees. However, the Committee on Armed Services, the Committee on International Relations, and the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure were allowed by separate order in the rules resolution to create up to six subcommittees each.70 H.Res. 5 in the 109th Congress maintained the existing rule on subcommittees. However, by separate order in the rules resolution, the Committee on Armed Services and the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure were entitled to create up to six subcommittees each, and the Committee on International Relations was allowed to create up to seven subcommittees in the 109th Congress. Procedure Committee Reports71 H.Res. 6 in the 104th Congress added content requirements to the directive to committees [Text truncated at 120,000 characters. The full text is on the page linked above.] --- Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/crs%3ARL33610. Public record. Not legal advice.