Committee of the Whole (United States House of Representatives): Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Latest revision as of 16:16, 29 December 2023

In the United States House of Representatives, a Committee of the Whole House is a congressional committee that includes all members of the House. In modern practice there is only one such committee, the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union, which has original consideration of all bills on the Union Calendar.^[1] While assembled, the House may resolve itself temporarily into a Committee of the Whole House. Business can then proceed with various procedural requirements relaxed. At the conclusion of business, the committee resolves to "rise" and reports its conclusions (typically in the form of an amended bill) or lack of conclusion to the speaker.

When the House resolves into a Committee of the Whole House, the speaker appoints another member to the chair, and this member is responsible for delivering the committee's report. Conventionally, the speaker appoints a member of the majority party who does not hold the chair of a standing committee. A Committee of the Whole House requires 100 members for a quorum as compared to the House's majority of 218, while only 25 members are required to force a recorded (rather than voice) vote as compared to the typical requirement of one-fifth of the members present.

History[edit]

The tradition of a committee of the whole originates in the English House of Commons, where it is attested as early as 1607. In only a few years it became a near-daily process used to debate matters without representatives of the Crown present,^[2] and the custom was subsequently adopted by deliberative assemblies in other Crown provinces. The American Continental Congress, for example, established committees of the whole "to take into consideration the state of America."

The rules of the House in the 1st United States Congress expressly provided for the House, on any business day, to resolve itself into the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union. This procedure was used to discuss matters for which no specific action had been decided.^[3] Since 1807, the Committee has also been the recipient of the President's messages on the State of the Union.^[3] Other ad hoc committees of the whole were established and charged through the normal committee process, but in time, a custom developed whereby the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union considered public bills and a separate Committee of the Whole House considered all private bills.^[3] The Committee of the Whole House for private bills was abolished by the 106th Congress, which transferred their consideration to the House proper.

For most of the House's history, votes in the Committee of the Whole were off record. The Legislative Reorganization Act of 1970 provided for the recording of votes by name upon the request of 25 members, which is routine for amendment votes.

Participation of non-voting delegates[edit]

In 1993, Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-DC), along with the Resident Commissioner from Puerto Rico and the delegates from Guam, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and American Samoa, received a limited vote in the Committee of the Whole, based on their right to vote in legislative committees. However, this limited vote stipulated if any of the delegates provided the deciding vote on an issue considered by the Committee of the Whole, a new vote would be conducted and the delegates would not be allowed to vote. The right of delegates to vote in Committee of the Whole was removed by the Republican majority in 1995 after that party gained control of Congress in the 1994 congressional elections.^[4] In January 2007, it was proposed by Democrats in the House that the 1993–1994 procedure be revived.^[5] The House approved the proposal with the adoption of H.Res. 78 by a vote of 226–191.

On January 5, 2011, at the start of the 112th Congress, the Republican-controlled House voted for a rules package that included stripping non-voting delegates of their votes in the Committee of the Whole. Del. Norton proposed tabling the motion pending further study of the non-voting delegate issue, but was defeated in a 225–188 party-line vote.^[6] At the start of each new Congress since 2011, Del. Norton and her fellow non-voting delegates have sought restoration of the right to vote in the Committee of the Whole but House Republicans have not voted in favor of the proposal.^[7]

The delegates from the District of Columbia, American Samoa, Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands, and the U.S. Virgin Islands, along with the Resident Commissioner from Puerto Rico, have proposed several bipartisan rule changes for the 116th Congress, including restoring their vote in the Committee of the Whole.^[8] When Democrats regained control in the 116th United States Congress, they again reinstated the right of delegates to vote in the committee of the whole.^[9]

Former use in the Senate[edit]

Until 1930, the United States Senate considered all bills in the committee of the whole, or "quasi-committee," before a final debate. The usual rules of debate applied, but only amendments could be considered and tentatively approved. It was possible for a bill to go through four debates: consideration and reconsideration in quasi-committee, then final consideration and reconsideration in the Senate. This practice ended for bills and joint resolutions in 1930, and for treaties in 1986.^[10]^[11]

References[edit]

^ "Government 101: How a Bill Becomes Law – Project Vote Smart". Votesmart.org. Retrieved July 4, 2012.
^ Bond, Maurice (1966) "The History of Parliament and The Evolution of Parliamentary Procedure"
^ ^a ^b ^c Hinds, Asher (1907) Hinds' Precedents
^ "Eleanor Holmes Norton: Biography and Much More from". Answers.com. Retrieved July 4, 2012.
^ Webley, Kayla (January 24, 2007). "Delegates Want an Official Chance to Make Their Voices Heard". Kansas City InfoZine. Retrieved July 4, 2012.
^ Pershing, Ben (January 5, 2011). "Washington Post – Norton fails in effort to prevent loss of Committee of the Whole vote". Voices.washingtonpost.com. Retrieved July 4, 2012.
^ Portnoy, Jenna (January 3, 2017). "Republican-led Congress denies D.C. delegate a vote. Again". The Washington Post. Washington, D.C. Retrieved December 17, 2018.
^ "Bordallo Seeks Congressional Voting Rights for Next Guam Delegate" (Press release). Washington, D.C.: Del. Madeleine Z. Bordallo (D-Guam). September 13, 2018. Archived from the original on December 18, 2018. Retrieved December 17, 2018.
^ McPherson, Lindsey. "House adopts rules package with few Democratic defections over PAYGO provision". Roll Call. CQ Roll Call. Archived from the original on 14 January 2019. Retrieved 21 February 2019.
^ "Riddick's Senate Procedure – 101st Congress, 2d Session, Page 335" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on February 6, 2012. Retrieved July 4, 2012.
^ S. Res. 28 (1986)

External links[edit]

Rules of the House of Representatives of the 109th Congress

[1] "Government 101: How a Bill Becomes Law – Project Vote Smart". Votesmart.org. Retrieved July 4, 2012.

[2] Bond, Maurice (1966) "The History of Parliament and The Evolution of Parliamentary Procedure"

[Hinds-3] Hinds, Asher (1907) Hinds' Precedents

[4] "Eleanor Holmes Norton: Biography and Much More from". Answers.com. Retrieved July 4, 2012.

[5] Webley, Kayla (January 24, 2007). "Delegates Want an Official Chance to Make Their Voices Heard". Kansas City InfoZine. Retrieved July 4, 2012.

[6] Pershing, Ben (January 5, 2011). "Washington Post – Norton fails in effort to prevent loss of Committee of the Whole vote". Voices.washingtonpost.com. Retrieved July 4, 2012.

[7] Portnoy, Jenna (January 3, 2017). "Republican-led Congress denies D.C. delegate a vote. Again". The Washington Post. Washington, D.C. Retrieved December 17, 2018.

[8] "Bordallo Seeks Congressional Voting Rights for Next Guam Delegate" (Press release). Washington, D.C.: Del. Madeleine Z. Bordallo (D-Guam). September 13, 2018. Archived from the original on December 18, 2018. Retrieved December 17, 2018.

[9] McPherson, Lindsey. "House adopts rules package with few Democratic defections over PAYGO provision". Roll Call. CQ Roll Call. Archived from the original on 14 January 2019. Retrieved 21 February 2019.

[riddick-10] "Riddick's Senate Procedure – 101st Congress, 2d Session, Page 335" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on February 6, 2012. Retrieved July 4, 2012.

[11] S. Res. 28 (1986)

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]

[10]

[11]

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
+{{Short description|Largest US congressional committee}}
 {{United States House of Representatives}}
-In the [[United States House of Representatives]], a '''Committee of the Whole House''' is a [[United States congressional committee|congressional committee]] that includes all members of the House. In modern practice there is only one such committee, the '''Committee of the Whole House on the <!-- lower-case -->state of the Union''', which has original consideration of all bills on the [[Union Calendar]].<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.votesmart.org/resource_govt101_02.php |title=Government 101: How a Bill Becomes Law – Project Vote Smart |publisher=Votesmart.org |access-date=July 4, 2012}}</ref> While assembled the House may resolve itself temporarily into a Committee of the Whole House. Business can then proceed with various procedural requirements relaxed. At the conclusion of business, the committee resolves to "rise" and reports its conclusions (typically in the form of an amended bill) or lack of conclusion to the [[Speaker of the United States House of Representatives|speaker]].
+In the [[United States House of Representatives]], a '''Committee of the Whole House''' is a [[United States congressional committee|congressional committee]] that includes all members of the House. In modern practice there is only one such committee, the '''Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union''', which has original consideration of all bills on the [[Union Calendar]].<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.votesmart.org/resource_govt101_02.php |title=Government 101: How a Bill Becomes Law – Project Vote Smart |publisher=Votesmart.org |access-date=July 4, 2012}}</ref> While assembled, the House may resolve itself temporarily into a Committee of the Whole House. Business can then proceed with various procedural requirements relaxed. At the conclusion of business, the committee resolves to "rise" and reports its conclusions (typically in the form of an amended bill) or lack of conclusion to the [[Speaker of the United States House of Representatives|speaker]].
-When the House resolves into a Committee of the Whole House, the speaker appoints another member to the chair, and this member is responsible for delivering the committee's report. Conventionally, the speaker appoints a member of the majority party who does not hold the chair of a [[Standing committee (United States Congress)|standing committee]]. A Committee of the Whole House requires 100 members for a [[quorum]] as compared to the House's majority of 218, while only 25 members are required to force a recorded rather than voice vote.
+When the House resolves into a Committee of the Whole House, the speaker appoints another member to the chair, and this member is responsible for delivering the committee's report. Conventionally, the speaker appoints a member of the majority party who does not hold the chair of a [[Standing committee (United States Congress)|standing committee]]. A Committee of the Whole House requires 100 members for a [[quorum]] as compared to the House's majority of 218, while only 25 members are required to force a recorded (rather than voice) vote as compared to the typical requirement of [[Article One of the United States Constitution#Clause 3: Record of proceedings|one-fifth of the members present]].
 ==History==
 The tradition of a [[committee of the whole]] originates in the [[House of Commons of England|English House of Commons]], where it is attested as early as 1607. In only a few years it became a near-daily process used to debate matters without representatives of the Crown present,<ref>Bond, Maurice (1966) "[https://www.parliament.uk/documents/parliamentary-archives/evolution.pdf The History of Parliament and The Evolution of Parliamentary Procedure]"</ref> and the custom was subsequently adopted by deliberative assemblies in other Crown provinces. The American [[Continental Congress]], for example, established committees of the whole "to take into consideration the state of America."
-The rules of the House in the [[1st United States Congress]] expressly provided for the House, on any business day, to resolve itself into the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union. This procedure was used to discuss matters for which no specific action had been decided.<ref name="Hinds">Hinds, Asher (1907) ''Hinds' Precedents''</ref> Since 1807 the Committee has also been the recipient of the [[President of the United States|President]]'s messages on the [[State of the Union]].<ref name="Hinds"/> Other ''ad hoc'' committees of the whole were established and charged through the normal committee process, but in time a custom developed whereby the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union considered [[public bill]]s and a separate Committee of the Whole House considered all [[private bill]]s.<ref name="Hinds"/> The Committee of the Whole House for private bills was abolished by the [[106th Congress]], which transferred their consideration to the House proper.
+The rules of the House in the [[1st United States Congress]] expressly provided for the House, on any business day, to resolve itself into the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union. This procedure was used to discuss matters for which no specific action had been decided.<ref name="Hinds">Hinds, Asher (1907) ''Hinds' Precedents''</ref> Since 1807, the Committee has also been the recipient of the [[President of the United States|President]]'s messages on the [[State of the Union]].<ref name="Hinds"/> Other ''ad hoc'' committees of the whole were established and charged through the normal committee process, but in time, a custom developed whereby the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union considered [[public bill]]s and a separate Committee of the Whole House considered all [[private bill]]s.<ref name="Hinds"/> The Committee of the Whole House for private bills was abolished by the [[106th Congress]], which transferred their consideration to the House proper.
 For most of the House's history, votes in the Committee of the Whole were off record. The [[Legislative Reorganization Act of 1970]] provided for the recording of votes by name upon the request of 25 members, which is routine for amendment votes.
 ==Participation of non-voting delegates==
+{{Update|date=December 2023}}
 In 1993, [[Delegate (United States Congress)|Delegate]] [[Eleanor Holmes Norton]] (D-DC), along with the [[Resident Commissioner of Puerto Rico|Resident Commissioner]] from [[Puerto Rico]] and the delegates from [[Guam]], the [[U.S. Virgin Islands]], and [[American Samoa]], received a limited vote in the Committee of the Whole, based on their right to vote in legislative committees.  However, this limited vote stipulated if any of the delegates provided the deciding vote on an issue considered by the Committee of the Whole, a new vote would be conducted and the delegates would not be allowed to vote.  The right of delegates to vote in Committee of the Whole was removed by the Republican majority in 1995 after that party gained control of Congress in the 1994 congressional elections.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.answers.com/topic/eleanor-holmes-norton |title=Eleanor Holmes Norton: Biography and Much More from |publisher=Answers.com |access-date=July 4, 2012}}</ref> In January 2007, it was proposed by Democrats in the House that the 1993–1994 procedure be revived.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.infozine.com/news/stories/op/storiesView/sid/20452/ |title=Delegates Want an Official Chance to Make Their Voices Heard|last=Webley|first=Kayla|publisher=Kansas City InfoZine |date=January 24, 2007 |access-date=July 4, 2012}}</ref> The House approved the proposal with the adoption of {{USBill|110|H.Res.|78}} by a vote of 226–191.
-On January 5, 2011, at the start of the 112th Congress, the Republican-controlled House voted for a rules package that included stripping non-voting delegates of their votes in the Committee of the Whole. Del. Norton proposed [[table (parliamentary procedure)#Congress|tabling the motion]] pending further study of the non-voting delegate issue, but was defeated in a 225–188 party-line vote.<ref>{{cite web|last=Pershing |first=Ben |url=http://voices.washingtonpost.com/dc/2011/01/norton_effort_to_prevent_loss.html |title=Washington Post – Norton fails in effort to prevent loss of Committee of the Whole vote |publisher=Voices.washingtonpost.com |date=January 5, 2011 |access-date=July 4, 2012}}</ref> At the start of each new Congress since 2011, Del. Norton and her fellow non-voting delegates have sought restoration of the right to vote in the Committee of the Whole but House Republicans have not voted in favor of the proposal.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/virginia-politics/republican-congress-denies-dc-representative-a-vote-again/2017/01/03/a8e32760-d1c8-11e6-945a-76f69a399dd5_story.html|title=Republican-led Congress denies D.C. delegate a vote. Again.|last=Portnoy|first=Jenna|date=January 3, 2017|access-date=December 17, 2018|work=The Washington Post|location=Washington, D.C.}}</ref>
+On January 5, 2011, at the start of the 112th Congress, the Republican-controlled House voted for a rules package that included stripping non-voting delegates of their votes in the Committee of the Whole. Del. Norton proposed [[table (parliamentary procedure)#Congress|tabling the motion]] pending further study of the non-voting delegate issue, but was defeated in a 225–188 party-line vote.<ref>{{cite web|last=Pershing |first=Ben |url=http://voices.washingtonpost.com/dc/2011/01/norton_effort_to_prevent_loss.html |title=Washington Post – Norton fails in effort to prevent loss of Committee of the Whole vote |publisher=Voices.washingtonpost.com |date=January 5, 2011 |access-date=July 4, 2012}}</ref> At the start of each new Congress since 2011, Del. Norton and her fellow non-voting delegates have sought restoration of the right to vote in the Committee of the Whole but House Republicans have not voted in favor of the proposal.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/virginia-politics/republican-congress-denies-dc-representative-a-vote-again/2017/01/03/a8e32760-d1c8-11e6-945a-76f69a399dd5_story.html|title=Republican-led Congress denies D.C. delegate a vote. Again.|last=Portnoy|first=Jenna|date=January 3, 2017|access-date=December 17, 2018|newspaper=The Washington Post|location=Washington, D.C.}}</ref>
-The delegates from the District of Columbia, American Samoa, Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands, and the U.S. Virgin Islands, along with the Resident Commissioner from Puerto Rico, have proposed several bipartisan rule changes for the 116th Congress, including restoring their vote in the Committee of the Whole.<ref>{{cite press release|author=<!--Staff writer(s); no by-line.-->|title=Bordallo Seeks Congressional Voting Rights for Next Guam Delegate|url=https://bordallo.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/bordallo-seeks-congressional-voting-rights-next-guam-delegate|location=Washington, D.C.|publisher=Del. Madeleine Z. Bordallo (D-Guam)|date=September 13, 2018|access-date=December 17, 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181218010507/https://bordallo.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/bordallo-seeks-congressional-voting-rights-next-guam-delegate|archive-date=December 18, 2018|url-status=dead}}</ref> When Democrats regained control in the 116th United States Congress, they again reinstated the right of delegates to vote in the committee of the whole.<ref>{{cite web |last1=McPherson |first1=Lindsey |title=House adopts rules package with few Democratic defections over PAYGO provision |url=https://www.rollcall.com/news/politics/house-adopts-rules-package-democratic-defections-paygo-provision |website=Roll Call |publisher=CQ Roll Call |access-date=21 February 2019}}</ref>
+The delegates from the District of Columbia, American Samoa, Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands, and the U.S. Virgin Islands, along with the Resident Commissioner from Puerto Rico, have proposed several bipartisan rule changes for the 116th Congress, including restoring their vote in the Committee of the Whole.<ref>{{cite press release|author=<!--Staff writer(s); no by-line.-->|title=Bordallo Seeks Congressional Voting Rights for Next Guam Delegate|url=https://bordallo.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/bordallo-seeks-congressional-voting-rights-next-guam-delegate|location=Washington, D.C.|publisher=Del. Madeleine Z. Bordallo (D-Guam)|date=September 13, 2018|access-date=December 17, 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181218010507/https://bordallo.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/bordallo-seeks-congressional-voting-rights-next-guam-delegate|archive-date=December 18, 2018|url-status=dead}}</ref> When Democrats regained control in the 116th United States Congress, they again reinstated the right of delegates to vote in the committee of the whole.<ref>{{cite web |last1=McPherson |first1=Lindsey |title=House adopts rules package with few Democratic defections over PAYGO provision |url=https://www.rollcall.com/news/politics/house-adopts-rules-package-democratic-defections-paygo-provision |website=Roll Call |publisher=CQ Roll Call |access-date=21 February 2019 |archive-date=14 January 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190114210205/https://www.rollcall.com/news/politics/house-adopts-rules-package-democratic-defections-paygo-provision |url-status=dead }}</ref>
 ==Former use in the Senate==
-Until 1930, the [[United States Senate]] considered all bills in the committee of the whole, or "quasi-committee," before a final debate. The usual rules of debate applied, but only amendments could be considered and tentatively approved. It was possible for a bill to go through four debates: consideration and reconsideration in quasi-committee, then final consideration and reconsideration in the Senate. This practice ended for bills and [[joint resolution]]s in 1930, and for treaties in 1986.<ref name="riddick">{{cite web|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120206204801/http://www.gpoaccess.gov/riddick/335.pdf |archive-date= February 6, 2012 |url=http://www.gpoaccess.gov/riddick/335.pdf |title=Riddick's Senate Procedure – 101st Congress, 2d Session, Page 335 |format=PDF |access-date=July 4, 2012 }}</ref><ref>S. Res. 28 (1986)</ref>
+Until 1930, the [[United States Senate]] considered all bills in the committee of the whole, or "quasi-committee," before a final debate. The usual rules of debate applied, but only amendments could be considered and tentatively approved. It was possible for a bill to go through four debates: consideration and reconsideration in quasi-committee, then final consideration and reconsideration in the Senate. This practice ended for bills and [[joint resolution]]s in 1930, and for treaties in 1986.<ref name="riddick">{{cite web|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120206204801/http://www.gpoaccess.gov/riddick/335.pdf |archive-date= February 6, 2012 |url=http://www.gpoaccess.gov/riddick/335.pdf |title=Riddick's Senate Procedure – 101st Congress, 2d Session, Page 335 |access-date=July 4, 2012 }}</ref><ref>S. Res. 28 (1986)</ref>
 ==See also==