La ii" . £‘!cf/‘i{{§,?: M; £23 5.305;’ 86_822 GOV Congressional Research Service The Library of Congress Washington, D.C. 20540 HOUSE AND SENATE RULES OF PROCEDURE: A BRIEF COMPARISON Ilona B. Nickels Analyst in American National Government Government Division August 4, 1986 Govefinneni Pubficafions Unfi JUL 29 i986?» Washington University Libraries Si L0um,lW0 63130 niversitr of Missouri - Columbia I ll lllllllll llllll llll llll 010-103941200 ABSTRACT There are significant differences between both the formal rules of procedure and the informal practices of the House and Senate. In the House, the individual Member must accommodate him or herself to the Chamber. In the Senate, the Chamber must accommodate itself to the individual Senator. This report discusses the differences in the waysthe two houses raise measures for consideration, conduct and end debate, use quorum calls, appeal rulings of the Chair, broadcast their proceedings, and take votes. It also compares special rules in the House with unanimous consent time agreements in the Senate, and compares the germaneness and recognition policies in the two chambers. HOUSE AND SENATE RULES OF PROCEDURE: A BRIEF COMPARISON Introduction There are significant differences between both the formal rules of procedure and the informal practices of the House of Representatives and the Senate. The large size of the House of Representatives and the need to accommodate 435 members in their deliberation and decision-making has brought about the evolution of a system of procedure that tends toward adherence to the formal rules, with limited flexibility. In contrast, the smaller size of the Senate and its tradition of accommodation has brought about the evolution of a system of procedure that tends toward a less formal and more flexible approach to its standing rules. The primary philosophical difference between the procedures of the two Chambers can be summarized by the following statement: in the House, the individual Member of Congress must accommodate him or herself to the Chamber. In the Senate, the Chamber must accommodate itself to the individual Senator. This report compares only selected differences between House and Senate procedures. It assumes a working knowledge of congressional procedure, and does not attempt to present a comprehensive discussion of the way the two Chambers operate. CR5-2 Raising Measures for Floor Consideration In the House, measures can be raised for consideration through a system of calendars, special days, and special procedures. There are prescribed days for the calls of the Consent and Private Calendars and for the conduct of District of Columbia business. The most frequently used special procedure is Suspension of the Rules. In addition, the Rules of the House grant certain committees privilege to call up at any time certain measures they have reported. Unanimous consent is also used frequently to call up a measure for consideration. Most significant measures, however, are made in order for floor consideration by a special rule reported from the House Rules Committee and agreed to by the entire House. Special rules are described in the next section. Finally, a measure may be raised for consideration through the adoption of a motion to discharge, but that is a rare occurence. In the Senate, measures are most often raised for consideration by simple unanimous consent requests, by complex unanimous consent agreements (described in the next section), or by the Senate's acceptance of a motion to proceed to the consideration of a measure. In addition, Senators frequently offer the text of a separate measure as a non-germane amendment to a bill already receiving floor consideration. The use of non-germane amendments is described in a later section. Motions to discharge and motions to suspend the rules are procedural devices available in the Senate, but their use is neither common nor analogous to their use in the House. CRS-3 The ability to raise measures for consideration in each chamber is a function of the authority to set the floor agenda. In both chambers, that authority rests primarily with the party leaders. In the House, whether to use special days/calendars, special procedures, special rules, unanimous consent, or privileged status to call up a measure is a decision made after consultation between the appropriate committee chairmen and the House party leadership. In the Senate, the offering of a unanimous consent request to consider a measure or the offering of a motion to proceed to the consideration of a measure is reserved, by tradition, to the Majority Leader. In setting the floor agenda, the Majority Leader consults with the Minority Leader, committee chairmen and any individual Senators who have notified him of their specific interest in a measure. However, individual Senators can, and do, circumvent the Majority Leader's control over the floor agenda by offering the entire texts of measures in the form of non-germane amendments to bills already receiving floor consideration. In addition, because measures are raised for consideration in the Senate most frequently by unanimous consent, the individual Senator can expect to have his scheduling needs and policy views considered by the party leaders as they seek to build the consensus necessary to raise a measure by unanimous consent. In summary, in the House, the committee and party leadership largely decide the floor agenda. A single Member cannot easily circumvent, influence, or reverse their decision. In the Senate, however, the individual Senator can participate in and directly influence the party and committee leadership’s decisions to set the floor agenda. Moreover, the individual Senator has procedural devices available to him to circumvent a leadership decision not to raise a measure for floor consideration. CRS-4 Special Rules vs. Unanimous Consent Agreements In the House, a special rule makes it in order to consider a specific measure and also sets forth the parliamentary conditions for its consideration. For example, a typical special rule will provide a time limitation on general debate, specify whether or not amendments will be in order, may set forth time limitations on debate on specified amendments, and may provide waivers to protect provisions in the measure or in specified amendments from having points of order raised against them. Special rules are drafted by and reported from the House Committee on Rules, a comittee which usually works in consort with the House party leadership. A special rule then must be adopted by a majority of the House before its provisions can go into effect. while the Senate also has a rules committee, the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration, it does not have responsibilities equivalent to those of the House Rules Comittee. In the Senate, unanimous consent agreements, sometimes referred to as "time agreements", are the functional equivalent of special rules in the House. These agreements make the consideration of a measure in order and set forth the parliamentary conditions for its consideration. Unanimous consent agreements are negotiated by the Majority Leader, in consultation with the Minority Leader, committee chairmen, and interested Senators, usually in private meetings but sometimes on the Senate floor. The agreements must be accepted by all the Senators on the floor at the time the Majority Leader or his designee propounds the agreement. One objection will prevent a unanimous consent agreement from going into effect. In summary, both special rules in the House and unanimous consent agreements in the Senate have the effect of expediting floor deliberations. The major difference between the two devices is that, while unanimous consent is required CRS-S to put a time agreement into effect in the Senate, a simple majority is required to adopt a special rule in the House. Therefore, because a single objection can serve to nullify a time agreement in the Senate, an individual Senator can expect to have a time agreement modified to accommodate his concerns. In contrast, an individual House Member or group of Members displeased with any provision of a proposed special rule can be overruled by majority vote. Executive Session The Senate frequently resolves itself into executive session for the purpose of considering executive branch nominations and treaties. Because the House does not share the Senate's constitutional responsibility to advise and consent, it has no equivalent forum. Committee of the Whole The House frequently resolves itself into the Committee of the Whole, usually pursuant to the provisions of a special rule, in order to take advantage of the expedited rules of procedure available in the Committee. These include the five-minute limitation on debate on amendments (although debate time on amendments under the "five-minute rule" is frequently extended through unanimous consent or through the use of "pro-forma” amendments to "strike the last word"), a smaller number required to constitute a quorum, and a smaller number required to secure the call for a recorded vote. The standing rules of the Senate no longer provide for a Committee of the Whole in legislative session. While the standing rules of the Senate provide CRS-6 for a Committee of the Whole in executive session to consider treaties, it is rarely used. Debate In the House, debate always take place under some form of restriction. There are "one-minute" speeches, the "one-hour" rule in the House, the "five- fminute" rule during the amendment process in the Committee of the Whole, time limitations prescribed in a special rule, and "special order" speeches, which are always granted for a specified amount of time. In addition, debate on ,certain types of measures, such as budget resolutions, may be considered under the restrictions imposed by rule-making statutes. In the Senate, no restriction on the length of debate exists in the normal course of events. Once recognized, a Senator may speak for as long as he wishes. He loses the floor only when he yields it or takes certain parliamentary actions which forfeit his right to the floor. However, the Senate often voluntarily agrees to specific debate restrictions through the use of unanimous consent requests or agreements. As in the House, debate on certain types of measures may be governed by rule-making statutes. Senators may also be granted a special order, by unanimous consent, to give a speech for a limited amount of time at the beginning of the daily session. In the House, special order speeches are conducted at the end of the day. As a result of the differences in restrictions on debate in the two chambers, in general, the length of debate on measures is more structured and more predictable in the House and more spontaneous and less predictable in the Senate. CRS-7 Germaneness of Debate In the House, debate must be germane to the matter under consideration. Unanimous consent must be obtained to speak out of order on another subject or, to interrupt the proceedings with another matter. One-minute speeches and special order speeches are considered "non-legislative debate", and Members must receive unanimous consent to engage in them. In the Senate, germaneness of debate is required only for the first three hours after the Senate takes up business each day. However, the Senate rarely enforces this rule. Moreover, unanimous consent is often sought and usually granted, to speak out of turn on another subject or to interrupt the proceedings with another matter. As a result of the differences in the germaneness requirement in the two chambers, debate in the House has a more structured quality while debate in the Senate has a more spontaneous quality. Germaneness of Amendments In the House, amendments must be germane, unless a special rule specifically permits the offering of specified non-germane amendments. In the Senate, amendments need not be germane, except in four specific instances: 1) if a unanimous consent agreement so requires; 2) in the post- cloture period; 3) if a rule-making statute so requires (e.g. the Congressional Budget Act which governs the consideration of budget resolutions and reconciliation bills); and 4) if the underlying measure is a general appropriations bill. CRS-8 In summary, the use of non-germane amendments as a procedural device to bring a matter up for floor consideration is an option an individual Senator usually enjoys but is an option available to the individual House Member only when there is majority support for the action. Ending Debate In the House of Representatives, a motion for the previous question can be offered. Adoption of the motion by simple majority vote has the effect of closing debate and of bringing the matter at hand to an imediate vote. If the House is meeting in Committee of the Whole, a motion for the previous question is not available, but a motion to close debate may be offered instead. If the Committee of the Whole is operating under the parliamentary conditions established by a previously adopted special rule, time limitations on general debate, as well as time limitations on debate of specified amendments may be in place. when these time limitations expire, so does the debate. In addition, during the amendment process in Committee, unanimous consent requests may be offered to end debate at that moment or to end it at a later, specified time. In the Senate, debate ends when a Senator yields the floor and no other Senator seeks recognition, or when a unanimous consent agreement limiting debate is operating. In addition, when a cloture petition to end debate on a motion or measure has been filed, and the subsequent cloture motion has been adopted by three-fifths of the Senate, mandatory time periods set forth under the cloture rule will govern the expiration of debate. Finally, a motion to table a measure, motion, or an amendment may be offered. Adoption of the motion has the effect of ending all debate. However, it also defeats the CRS-9 ‘underlying matter and therefore is a useful device only in certain circumstances. In summary, ending debate is always possible in the House, with a majority vote. In the Senate, however, ending debate is a difficult and cumbersome process, often involving the need to obtain an extraordinary majority vote. Recognition In the House, the Chair has considerable authority to recognize or not recognize Members to speak. "For what purpose does the Gentleman rise?", is an accepted and frequently used, although inconsistently applied, query. In the Senate, the Presiding Officer is directed to recognize the first Senator standing and seeking recognition. By tradition, the Presiding Officer will recognize the Majority and Minority Leader on a preferential basis, if they desire recognition. However, he never interrogates a Senator as to the purpose for which he seeks recognition. In summary, the basic difference in the recognition practices between the two chambers is that the Chair in the House has significant control over the flow of floor proceedings by recognizing or not recognizing Members to speak, while the Presiding Officer in the Senate retains no such control. Appealing Rulings of the Chair In the House, rulings of the Chair on points of order raised by Members, by tradition, are very rarely appealed. As a result, a relatively consistent body of precedents based on parliamentary interpretation has evolved. lcas-10 In the Senate, rulings of the Presiding Officer on points of order raised by Senators are frequently appealed. The Senate, as a whole, votes on the motion to appeal or a motion to table it, thus deciding whether or not to uphold the ruling. In addition, the Presiding Officer sometimes exercises the option of putting the point of order directly to the Senate for a decision by majority vote. The votes of the Senate in response to appeals or to points of order put directly to the body by the Presiding Officer can be based on the political concerns of a majority of the Senate at that moment as well as on a parliamentary interpretation of the point of order. As a result, the Senate has a smaller and less consistent body of precedents than that of the House. Quorum Calls In the House, points of order that no quorum is present are made to ascertain the presence of Members, and are usually in order only in connection with a roll-call vote. Each quorum call is usually completed within 15 minutes. In the Senate, quorum calls can be made for the same purpose. More commonly, however, a Senator "suggests the absence of a-quorum” for purposes of constructive delay. The effect of such a suggestion is to suspend action on the Senate floor, without requiring the Senate to recess or adjourn. yThis permits informal negotiations to take place or allows awaited Senators the opportunity to reach the floor. The Clerk slowly calls the roll until unanimous consent is requested to dispense with the call. There is no limit on the duration of this type of quorum call. CR8-ll Broadcasting The House has allowed live radio and television coverage of its floor proceedings to the public since 1979. The Senate authorized live radio and television coverage of its floor proceedings to the public on a permanent basis on July 29, 1986. The Senate had conducted an in-house closed circuit television test period from May 1, 1986 to June 2, 1986. From June 2, 1986 to July 15, 1986 the Senate permitted live television coverage to the public on a trial basis. .Live radio broadcasting to the public began March 12, 1986 on a trial basis and was made permanent on July 29, 1986. O Vot1ng Procedures Both the House and the Senate dispose of legislative business through either 1) unanimous consent, 2) voice vote, 3) division (standing) vote, or 4) roll-call votes. In the House, a demand for a roll-call vote must be supported by 1/5 of a quorum (a minimum of 44 Members) or, if meeting as the Committee of the Whole, by 25 Members. Roll-call vote periods are limited to 15 minutes, however, at the discretion of the Speaker, this period may be extended. The House uses electronic voting equipment to digitally display and tabulate roll-call votes. In the Senate, a demand for a roll-call vote (referred to as the "yeas- and-nays") must be supported by 1/5 of a quorum (a minimum of 11 Senators). The Senate has limited the roll-call vote period to 15 minutes. However, the Majority and Minority Leaders may extend this period at their discretion. The CRS-12 Senate conducts roll-call votes by directing its Clerk to call the roll audibly. No electric voting equipment is used. IBN:pjg --4-—-"""“""—"”‘.-.‘-.—. Y tJBRARY OF Vupu3FHfiM§TCH4 ur'~11*~JE=.s-‘.-a§~::‘I“‘*a’ L 3;;-_ LOUIS — M0-