Order Code 97-1045 GOV
Updated November 26, 2008
House Rules and Precedents Affecting
Committee Markup Procedures
Christopher M. Davis
Analyst on the Congress and Legislative Process
Government and Finance Division
Summary
Markup procedures in standing committees of the House of Representatives
generally conform to guidelines the House follows when it conducts business on the
floor under a set of procedures known as consideration by the “House as in Committee
of the Whole.” Consideration by the “House as in Committee of the Whole” is not the
same as the more common practice of the House “resolving itself into the Committee
of the Whole House,” but is, instead, a more rarely-used set of procedures that combines
elements of both procedures used in the House and procedures used the Committee of
the Whole. This report briefly discusses these procedures as they relate to legislative
business conducted on the floor and in committee. For more information on legislative
process, see [http://www.crs.gov/products/guides/guidehome.shtml].
Background
The rules of the House of Representatives are ambiguous with respect to the
procedures that its standing committees are to follow when they mark up legislation.
Clause 1(a)(1) of Rule XI generally provides that “[t]he Rules of the House are the rules
of its committees and subcommittees so far as applicable.” At the same time, clause 2(a)
of the same rule directs each standing committee to adopt written rules governing its own
actions that “may not be inconsistent with the Rules of the House or with those provisions
of law having the force and effect of Rules of the House....”1
Two problems arise from this ambiguity. First, the House rules do not clearly define
which House rules are applicable to committees and subcommittees, nor do they provide
criteria to judge whether individual committee rules are consistent with overall House
rules. Second, the House’s rules contain different sets of procedures that the House uses
under different circumstances to consider legislation on the floor. It would not be
possible for all of these procedures to apply to committees simultaneously.
1 This report was originally written by Stanley Bach, formerly a senior specialist in the
Legislative Process at CRS.

---

CRS-2
House as in Committee of the Whole
Over time, markup procedures in standing committees of the House of
Representatives have come to generally conform to practices the House follows when it
conducts business on the floor under a rarely-used set of procedures called consideration
by the “House as in Committee of the Whole.” It is important to note that consideration
by the “House as in Committee of the Whole” is not the same as the more common
practice of the House “resolving itself into the Committee of the Whole House” but is,
instead, a more infrequently used hybrid set of procedures that combines elements of both
procedures used in the House and procedures used the Committee of the Whole. It is not
a practice that is defined in the House Rules.
The House parliamentarian provides guidance when he notes in the commentary
accompanying Section XXX of Jefferson’s Manual that “[t]he procedures applicable in
the House as in the Committee of the Whole generally apply to proceedings in committees
of the House of Representatives.” He also points out several exceptions to this general
statement, some of which are discussed below.
It should be emphasized that the rules of the House do not explicitly direct House
committees to follow the procedures applicable in the “House as in Committee of the
Whole”; this nearly universal practice has simply evolved over time. It is generally left
to each committee to enforce or disregard its procedures governing debate and
amendment during markup sessions.
On the Floor
There is a distinctive set of procedures that the House follows when it considers a
measure on the floor in the House as in Committee of the Whole. These procedures are
not spelled out in the House’s standing rules; they are a matter of precedent and the House
does not use them very often.
There are four circumstances in which the House may consider measures in the
House as in Committee of the Whole. First, when the Committee on Oversight and
Government Reform calls up a bill on one of the days specially set aside for measures
concerning the District of Columbia, the House may agree by unanimous consent to
consider that bill in the House as in Committee of the Whole. Second, the House
sometimes has agreed, by unanimous consent, to consider an appropriations or rescission
measure in this way. Third, private bills are to be considered in the House as in
Committee of the Whole. Fourth, this set of procedures is to be used for considering
measures that are on the Union Calendar (or would be placed on the Union Calendar if
reported from committee) and that are brought to the floor by unanimous consent. In the
last two cases, however, these bills usually are passed without any formal debate, so the
procedures, while technically in force, are rarely actually invoked.
As its name suggests, the procedures applicable in the House as in Committee of the
Whole combine elements of the procedures that apply in the House and those followed
in Committee of the Whole. When a bill is considered in the House as in Committee of
the Whole, the Speaker continues to preside. A quorum is 218 members, as opposed to

---

CRS-3
a quorum of 100 in the Committee of the Whole. The House does not actually resolve
itself into Committee of the Whole, but in some respects, it acts as if it had. There is no
general debate, and all debate takes place under the five-minute rule, not the one-hour
rule. Thus, the majority floor manager moves to “strike the last word” in order to secure
five minutes in which to make his or her opening statement. Other Members also use
such pro forma amendments to gain time for debate.
In the House as in Committee of the Whole, the bill is not read for amendment; it is
open to amendment at any point. During consideration of the bill and each amendment
to it, both the motion to limit or close debate and the motion to order the previous
question are available.
The majority floor manager (or another Member) may move to limit or close debate
on a pending amendment and all amendments thereto. Adopting this motion requires only
a simple majority vote. If the motion is adopted and after any remaining time for debate
expires, Members still can offer amendments to the pending amendment before the House
votes on it, but there is no time for debating any of these amendments either. Because the
bill is open to amendment at any point, the majority floor manager (or another Member)
also may move to limit or close debate on the entire bill and all amendments thereto.
Again, once debate ends, additional amendments remain in order but cannot be explained,
except by unanimous consent.
Alternatively, the majority floor manager (or another Member) may move to order
the previous question on the pending amendment or on the bill and all amendments
thereto. If the House adopts this motion, also by simple majority vote, that ends the
debate, precludes further amendments, and brings the House to a vote on adopting the
amendment or a vote on passing the bill (unless a Member intervenes by offering a motion
to recommit). The previous question may not be moved on a portion of a bill.
In Committee
When a standing committee begins meeting to mark up the text or draft of a
legislative measure, the measure first should be read in full. This requirement derives
from a provision of Jefferson’s Manual (Section XXVI) that continues to apply to the
House today. However, Rule XI, clause 1(a)(1)(B), provides for a highly privileged and
nondebatable motion to waive this first reading in committee or subcommittee if printed
copies of the text are available.
In committee, the text then is read for amendment, section by section. The text is not
considered as read and open to amendment at any point; this is one respect in which the
procedures of the House as in Committee of the Whole do not apply in committee.
Furthermore, each section must be read, not merely designated. By contrast, on the floor,
when the House considers a bill in Committee of the Whole under the terms of a special
rule, that rule often provides for each section to be designated, not read. In committee,
the reading of a section can be dispensed with by unanimous consent, but not by motion.
When a section has been read, committee members may offer amendments to it, just
as they can on the floor when the House has resolved into Committee of the Whole.
Unless they obtain unanimous consent, Members may not offer amendments to a section
of the bill that has not yet been read or to a section after a subsequent section has been

---

CRS-4
read. Each amendment offered must be in writing and must be read before debate on it
begins, unless the reading is waived by unanimous consent. An amendment may be
withdrawn by the Member offering it without the need for unanimous consent unless the
committee has already acted on it.
Committee members may speak on the bill and amendments under a five-minute
rule. In contrast to the House’s floor procedures, however, committee members do not
have to offer pro forma amendments (i.e., moving to strike the last word) in order to
secure five minutes for debate. A committee member who wishes to speak for five
minutes merely needs to seek recognition from the chair.
In recognizing committee members to speak and offer amendments, the chair is
expected to be guided by the same practices that the chairman of the Committee of the
Whole follows on the floor: generally alternating between Members of the two parties and
generally recognizing Members in order of their seniority. Some committees have
established so-called “early bird” rules that afford priority in recognition to Members who
arrived before the hearing commenced.
In committee, a motion is in order to limit or close debate on the pending amendment
(and all amendments thereto) or on the pending section of the bill (and all amendments
thereto). However, because a bill is read for amendment by sections, it is not in order to
move to limit or close debate on the entire bill until the reading of the bill has been
completed or the committee has agreed by unanimous consent to consider the bill as
having been read. Similarly, a Member may move the previous question on the pending
amendment (and all amendments thereto), or on the entire bill (and all amendments
thereto) after the bill has been read or considered as read. As on the House floor, the
previous question may not be moved and ordered on just a section of a bill.
In addition, under one commonly-used procedure, the chair can offer, or recognize
another Member to offer, an amendment in the nature of a substitute, which is essentially
a full-text alternative to the pending measure. Such an amendment can only be offered
at the beginning or end of the process, and is then open to amendment at any point. When
an amendment in the nature of a substitute is offered at the beginning of the markup, it
serves as the base text and Members ordinarily will direct their amendments to the
substitute, rather than the underlying bill. Some committees choose to use this procedure
because it allows the previous question to be moved on such an amendment following
debate on it, cutting off all further discussion and amendments to the measure being
marked up. An amendment in the nature of a substitute can also have other political and
parliamentary advantages. Using such an amendment allows the chair to keep the text to
be marked up out of the public eye literally until the markup commences if he so chooses.
Reporting one committee substitute that represents all of the changes made at a markup
is also potentially easier to deal with on the House floor than reporting a bill with multiple
“cut and bite” amendments.
The parliamentarian notes that committees “may employ the ordinary motions which
are in order in the House,” such as motions to adjourn, table, postpone to a day certain,
postpone indefinitely, and reconsider. During debate on amendments, however, the
motion to table rarely is employed in committee because “when a proposed amendment
is laid on the table the pending bill goes there also.”

---

CRS-5
Points of Order
It is generally left to each committee to enforce or disregard its procedures governing
debate and amendment during markup sessions. The House parliamentarian has stated
that a point of order does not ordinarily lie in the House against consideration of a bill by
reason of defective committee procedures occurring prior to the time the bill was ordered
reported to the House. Such point of order, if made in the House, may be overruled on
the ground that the rules of a particular committee are for that committee to interpret
unless they are in direct conflict with the rules of the House or unless the House rules
specifically permit the raising of such objections.2
2 William Holmes Brown and Charles W. Johnson, House Practice, A Guide to the Rules,
Precedents and Procedures of the House (Washington: GPO, 2003), ch. 11, §15, p. 267.

---