Conference Committee and Related Procedures: An Introduction

November 6, 2007 – May 21, 2021 96-708

Conference Committee and Related
May 21, 2021
Procedures: An Introduction
Elizabeth Rybicki
The House and Senate must pass the same bill or joint resolution in precisely the same form
Specialist on Congress and
before it can be presented to the President. Once both houses have passed the same measure, they
the Legislative Process
can resolve their differences over the text of that measure either through an exchange of

amendments between the houses or through the creation of a conference committee.

The House and Senate each have an opportunity to amend the other chamber’s amendments to a
bill; thus, there can be House amendments to Senate amendments to House amendments to a Senate bill. If either chamber
accepts the other’s amendments, the legislative process is complete. Alternatively, each house may reach the stage of
disagreement at any time by insisting on its own position or by disagreeing to the position of the other chamber. Having
decided to disagree, they then typically agree to create a conference committee to propose a single negotiated settlement of
all their differences.
Conference committees are generally free to conduct their negotiations as they choose, but under the formal rules they are
expected to address only the matters on which the House and Senate have disagreed. Moreover, they are to propose
settlements that represent compromises between the positions of the two houses. When they have completed their work, they
submit a conference report and joint explanatory statement, and the House and Senate vote on accepting the report without
amendments. Only after the two houses have reached complete agreement on all provisions of a bill can it be sent to the
President for his approval or veto.
Congressional Research Service

Conference Committee and Related Procedures: An Introduction

Introduction
This report is a brief summary of House and Senate procedures for reaching agreement on
legislation. It discusses the provisions of House Rule XXII and Senate Rule XXVIII as well as
other applicable rules, precedents, and practices. The report focuses on the most common and
customary procedures. There are many exceptions, complications, and possibilities that are not
addressed, and the House and Senate may modify or waive their procedures by unanimous
consent or by other means.
Acting on the Same Bill
The House and Senate must pass the same bill or joint resolution, and they must reach full and
precise agreement on its text before it is submitted to the President for his approval or veto. The
same requirements apply to a concurrent resolution and a joint resolution proposing a
constitutional amendment, although neither receives presidential action.
At some stage of the legislative process, therefore, the House must pass a Senate bill or the
Senate must pass a House bill. The simplest way of meeting this requirement is for one house to
pass its own bill and send it to the “other body,” which then considers and passes it, with or
without amendments. Frequently, however, House and Senate committees each develop their own
bills on the same subject. In these cases, one house often debates and amends the bill reported by
its committee but then amends and passes the corresponding bill that the other chamber has
already passed.
For example, after the House passes a bill, it frequently takes up a bill on the same subject that it
has already received from the Senate. The House then amends the Senate bill by striking out the
text passed by the Senate (striking out all after the enacting clause) and replacing it with the text
of the House bill it has just passed. The House then passes the amended Senate bill. In this way,
the House passes two bills with exactly the same text, but the Senate bill is the one likely to
become law because both houses now have passed it, although with different provisions. Much
the same thing could happen in the Senate. After considering its own bill, the Senate, by
unanimous consent, could take up and pass the House bill after amending it with the text of the
Senate-passed bill. Because this action would take unanimous consent in the Senate, however, the
Senate might choose instead to begin consideration of the similar House bill. The floor manager
could offer as the first amendment to the House bill a full-text substitute consisting of the text of
the Senate bill.
This process is usually routine, but it can become more complicated. For instance, the Senate may
pass one bill on several related matters before the House passes two bills of its own that address
the same subjects. After the House passes its two bills, it may take up the one Senate bill and
replace the text of that bill with the texts of both of its own bills. In other instances, the House and
Senate may confront political and procedural situations that make it convenient for them to
include their versions of legislation on one subject as amendments to some third bill on an
unrelated subject that serves as a convenient “vehicle.” Such arrangements can be necessary
because the House and Senate cannot begin the formal process of resolving their policy
differences until these differences are embodied as amendments by one house to the version of
the same bill as passed by the other.
Congressional Research Service

1

Conference Committee and Related Procedures: An Introduction

Amendments Between the Houses
After one house passes a bill and the other then passes it with amendments, the House and Senate
may attempt to resolve the differences between their positions. When confronted with a major
bill, the two houses have historically created a conference committee for this purpose. However, a
conference may not be necessary if they can reach an agreement through informal negotiations
and an exchange of amendments between the houses.
The amendments of one house to a bill from the other may be amended twice as the bill is sent
(“messaged”) back and forth between the House and Senate. Suppose, for example, that the
Senate passes a House bill with amendments. The House can accept (concur in) the Senate
amendments, in which case the differences are resolved. Alternatively, the House can amend the
Senate amendments (concur in the Senate amendments with amendments). These House
amendments are first degree amendments between the houses. The Senate can then accept
(concur in) the House amendments to the Senate amendments, which would produce agreement.
Or the Senate can concur in the House amendments to the Senate amendments with further
Senate amendments, which are amendments in the second degree.
At this stage, the House can concur in the most recent Senate amendments, but it cannot propose
new House amendments to them because they would be third degree amendments, which are not
permitted. (Of course, exactly the same process can occur in reverse if the House passes a Senate
bill with amendments.) In both chambers, the prohibition on third degree amendments between
the houses can be waived. The House might do this by special rule, suspension of the rules, or
unanimous consent. In the Senate, unanimous consent is necessary to agree to an amendment in
the third degree, unless the House has already waived the rule, in which case further degrees of
amendment are permitted in the Senate.
If the House and Senate adamantly defend their last amendments, they can send the bill back and
forth several more times. In the unlikely event that neither house retreats from its last position or
is willing to discuss a compromise in conference, the bill ultimately dies. It cannot be shuttled
back and forth indefinitely.
This process rarely results in stalemate, because the two houses either reach agreement or decide
to submit their differences to a conference committee. However, an exchange of amendments
sometimes takes the place of a conference. Once the two houses pass their versions of the same
bill, the members and staff of the House and Senate committees of jurisdiction often meet
informally to compare the two versions and discuss a compromise. If they reach an agreement
that other concerned Representatives and Senators also accept, the House can, for example,
concur in the Senate amendment with a House amendment that embodies the negotiated
agreement. If the Senate then accepts (concurs in) this House amendment, the House and Senate
have resolved their differences through the informal equivalent of a conference committee.
Considering Amendments from the Other House
House amendments to a Senate bill (or House amendments to Senate amendments to a House
bill) are privileged for floor action by the Senate. This means there is no debate on whether to
take up the House amendment. Instead, a Senator, most often the majority leader, typically
requests that a House amendment be laid before the Senate. Motions to dispose of the House
amendments—such as motions to concur or to concur with amendments—are debatable and,
therefore, subject to filibusters. It is possible for the majority leader to move that the Senate
concur in the House amendment and then propose motions that preempt all other available
Congressional Research Service

2

Conference Committee and Related Procedures: An Introduction

motions. This is often referred to as “filling the tree” on a motion to concur. If the majority leader
can garner the necessary support to end debate on the motion to concur (60 Senators, assuming no
vacancies), then both further amendment to the House amendment and extended debate can be
avoided. The Senate sometimes arranges to consider a House amendment by unanimous consent.
Like the Senate, the House sometimes acts on Senate amendments by unanimous consent. Until
the House officially disagrees to Senate amendments to a House bill (or Senate amendments to
House amendments to a Senate bill), these amendments are usually not privileged for
consideration on the House floor. No motion is in order to concur in the Senate amendments, with
or without amendments. When there is little or no controversy, the House often accepts or amends
the Senate amendments by unanimous consent. Otherwise, the House can usually do so only
through a motion to suspend the rules or under a special rule recommended by the Rules
Committee and adopted by the House. A motion that is privileged at this stage is a motion to
disagree to the Senate amendments and go to conference, but this motion must be made at the
direction of the committee that originally reported the bill to the House.
Both houses cannot consider the same bill at the same time, because the House or Senate can act
only if it has the “papers.” The papers are comprised of the official copy of the bill as passed by
the house in which it originated, the official copies of amendments by either house, and the
messages by which each house informs the other of the actions it has taken. After one house acts
on a bill or amendments from the other, it returns all the papers with an accompanying message
describing its action. Thus, the House and Senate always act in sequence as custody of the papers
changes hands.
Going to Conference
Before a conference committee is created to resolve disagreements between the two houses, the
House and Senate must each state disagreement over a bill, either by disagreeing to the
amendments of the “other body” or by insisting on its own amendments. So long as one house
concurs in the amendments of the other and proposes its own amendments, there is no formal
disagreement. But at any point during an exchange of amendments between the House and
Senate, either house can propose that they can go to conference instead.
The two houses usually decide in one of two ways to establish a conference committee. When the
Senate passes a House bill with amendments, for example, it can immediately insist on its
amendments and request a conference with the House. The House almost always agrees to the
conference, although it need not do so—for example, it could simply agree to the Senate
amendments instead. At other times, however, when the Senate passes a House bill with
amendments, it may merely send back the bill and the amendments in the hope that the House
will accept the Senate’s amendments, making a conference unnecessary. If the House does not
accept the amendments, it can disagree to them and request a conference. The Senate normally
then insists on its amendments and agrees to the conference, after which it informs the House and
returns the papers. Of course, the equivalent of either sequence of events may occur after the
House passes a Senate bill with amendments.
Both chambers sometimes agree by unanimous consent to the necessary procedural steps to send
a measure to conference. In the House, if there is an objection to the unanimous consent request,
then a privileged motion can be made, at the direction of the committee(s) of jurisdiction, to
disagree to the Senate amendment (or insist on the House amendment) and request (or agree to) a
conference with the Senate.
Congressional Research Service

3

Conference Committee and Related Procedures: An Introduction

If unanimous consent cannot be reached in the Senate, then a motion can be made to authorize a
conference committee, which is subject to debate under regular Senate rules. If a cloture motion
to end debate is filed on this motion, however, it matures after just two hours of debate. If three-
fifths of the Senate agrees to invoke cloture, then the Senate could immediately vote to approve
the motion to authorize a conference. No further debate of the motion would be in order.
Appointing and Instructing Conferees
Each house usually appoints its conferees (also known as managers) immediately after deciding
to go to conference. The Speaker appoints House conferees. The Senate frequently decides, by
unanimous consent, to authorize the presiding officer to appoint “the managers on the part of the
Senate.” The Senate could also empower the presiding officer to appoint conferees, or appoint
conferees directly, through the motion to authorize a conference, discussed above. The chair and
ranking minority member of the committee or subcommittee that reported the bill are almost
always conferees. They also play a major part in deciding who else is appointed. The committee
or subcommittee leaders usually prepare a list of conferees from their chambers that the Speaker
normally accepts and the presiding officer of the Senate always accepts. The party leaders may
also become involved in selecting conferees, especially if the bill is particularly important, if it
was reported by two or more committees, or if amendments to the bill from the other house touch
the jurisdiction of more than one committee.
Most conferees are members of the committee that reported the bill. In the case of a bill that
involves the jurisdiction of more than one committee, members of each committee are often
appointed as conferees with authority only to negotiate an agreement with respect to the subjects
or provisions of the bill that fall within the jurisdiction of their committees. Thus, some members
may be designated as conferees for purposes of the entire bill while others are appointed only to
address a specific section or title. Representatives may also be appointed as conferees for limited
purposes when the Senate proposes a nongermane amendment that is within the jurisdiction of
another House committee. In addition, the Speaker may appoint other Representatives who, for
example, offered important floor amendments. The list of conferees generally reflects the party
balance in each house.
The House and Senate do not have to appoint the same number of managers, and they frequently
do not. House conferees vote as a delegation, as do Senate conferees, and a majority of each
delegation must sign the conference report. Thus, three Representatives may have the same
voting power in conference as 30 Senators. Each house is likely to appoint a larger number of
conferees when the bill involves the jurisdiction of more than one of its standing committees.
A Representative or Senator may move to instruct the conferees from his or her chamber
immediately after that house agrees to go to conference but just before the conferees are
appointed.1 For example, the House can instruct its managers to insist on the House position on a
particular amendment, or the Senate can instruct its managers to recede to the House position on
another amendment. However, instructions to conferees are never binding; no point of order lies
against a conference report that is inconsistent with House or Senate instructions to its conferees.
The House can also instruct its conferees if they do not report within 45 calendar days and 25
legislative days after being appointed (or 36 hours after being appointed during the last six days
of a session).

1 Under some circumstances, the motion to instruct conferees in the House is a prerogative of the minority party. See
CRS Report 98-381, Instructing House Conferees, by Elizabeth Rybicki. See also CRS Report RS20209, Instructing
Senate Conferees, by Michael Greene.
Congressional Research Service

4

Conference Committee and Related Procedures: An Introduction

Conference Rules and Reports
Conference committee meetings are open to the public unless the conferees vote to close them,
and the House must vote to authorize its conferees to do so. Both chambers also have guidelines
concerning conference meetings, generally encouraging frequent meetings with open discussions,
but these guidelines are often waived or in some cases are not procedurally enforceable.
Beyond these guidelines, there are virtually no House or Senate rules governing conference
meetings. Conferees select their own chair and usually work without formal rules on quorums,
proxies, debate, amendments, and other procedural matters. Conferences are negotiating forums,
and the two chambers allow conferees to decide for themselves how best to conduct their
negotiations. It is most common that a conference committee holds a single public meeting,
sometimes for members to offer opening statements only.
However, the House and Senate have important, and roughly the same, rules governing what
decisions conferees can make. Conference committees are established to resolve disagreements
between the House and Senate over their versions of the same bill. Therefore, the authority of
conferees is limited to matters in disagreement. As a general rule, they may not change a
provision on which both houses agree, nor may they add anything that is not in one version or the
other. Furthermore, conferees are to reach agreements within the “scope” of the differences
between the House and Senate positions. For example, if the House appropriates $10 million for
some purpose and the Senate amends the bill by increasing the appropriation to $20 million, the
conferees exceed their authority if they agree on a number that is less than $10 million or more
than $20 million.
It is much harder to determine the scope of the differences when they are qualitative, not
quantitative. Also, conferees have more latitude under some circumstances than under others.
Under a previous practice, when one house would pass a bill and the other would then pass it with
a series of separate amendments—each making a change in a different provision of the bill—
these amendments were usually numbered, and it was relatively easy for the conferees to
determine the scope of the differences over each amendment. This is generally not true, however,
under modern practice when the Senate passes a House bill (or the House passes a Senate bill)
with an amendment in the nature of a substitute that totally replaces the text of the bill. In this
situation, which arises nearly all of the time, there is only one amendment in conference—for
example, a Senate substitute for the House version of a bill. The two versions of the bill can take
very different approaches to the same subject, making it difficult for the conferees to isolate every
point of agreement and disagreement and to identify the scope of each disagreement. Under these
circumstances, the conferees may write their own conference substitute, so long as it is a germane
modification of the House and Senate versions.
If a conference agreement exceeds the scope of the differences or deals with a matter that is not in
disagreement, the conference report is subject to a point of order when the House or Senate
considers it. The House, however, typically protects a conference report against points of order by
adopting a resolution reported by the Rules Committee waiving the applicable rules. The Senate,
meanwhile, interprets the authority of its conferees generously, especially when they develop a
conference substitute. Furthermore, the Senate can waive its rule with a three-fifths vote of
Senators duly chosen and sworn (60 Senators if there is no more than one vacancy).
Congressional Research Service

5

Conference Committee and Related Procedures: An Introduction

The authority of Senate conferees is further limited by Senate Rule XLIV, paragraph 8.2 Under
this rule, a Senator can raise a point of order against discretionary and mandatory spending
provisions of a conference report if they constitute “new directed spending provisions,” or what
are sometimes called “air drops.” Paragraph 8 defines a “new directed spending provision” as
follows:
any item that consists of a specific provision containing a specific level of funding for any
specific account, specific program, specific project, or specific activity, when no specific
funding was provided for such specific account, specific program, specific project, or
specific activity in the measure originally committed to the conferees by either House.
The Senate can waive these restrictions on the content of conference reports by a three-fifths vote
of Senators duly chosen and sworn (60 Senators assuming no more than one vacancy).
When the conferees reach full agreement, their staffs prepare a conference report that states how
they propose to resolve each of the disagreements. Accompanying the report itself is a joint
explanatory statement (also known as the statement of managers), which describes the various
House and Senate positions and the conferees’ recommendations in more detail. A majority of the
House managers and a majority of the Senate managers must sign both the conference report and
the joint explanatory statement.3 House rules require that House conferees be given an
opportunity to sign the conference agreement at a set time and place. At least one copy of the
final conference agreement must be made available for review by House managers with the
signature sheets. Each chamber then debates and votes on the conference report in turn.
Floor Action on Conference Reports
At the conclusion of a successful conference, the papers usually change hands. The conferees
from the house that requested the conference bring the papers into conference and then turn them
over to the conferees from the other house. Thus, the house that agreed to the conference
normally acts first on the conference report. However, this is a practice that is not required by
House or Senate rules.
The Senate usually takes up a conference report by unanimous consent, although a Senator can
make a nondebatable motion to consider it. The report may be called up at any time after it is
filed, but it is not in order to vote on the adoption of a conference report unless it has been
available to Members and the general public for at least 48 hours before the vote. (This
requirement can be waived by three-fifths of Senators duly chosen and sworn or by joint
agreement of the majority and minority leaders in the case of a significant disruption to Senate
facilities or to the availability of the internet.) Under Senate rules, a report is considered to be
available to the general public if it is posted on a congressional website or on a website controlled
by the Library of Congress or the Government Publishing Office.
When considered on the Senate floor, a conference report is debatable under normal Senate
procedures; it is subject to extended debate unless the time for debate is limited by unanimous
consent or cloture or if the Senate is considering the report under expedited procedures
established by law (such as the procedures for considering budget resolutions and budget
reconciliation measures under the Budget Act). Paragraph 8 of Senate Rule XXVIII states that, if

2 For more information, see CRS Report RS22733, Senate Rules Restricting the Content of Conference Reports, by
Elizabeth Rybicki.
3 When one or both houses have appointed conferees for limited purposes, the House and Senate have different
conventions for determining whether their conference report carries a sufficient number of signatures. See CRS Report
RS21629, Sufficiency of Signatures on Conference Reports, by Richard S. Beth and Elizabeth Rybicki.
Congressional Research Service

6

Conference Committee and Related Procedures: An Introduction

time for debating a conference report is limited (presumably by unanimous consent), that time
shall be equally divided between the majority and minority parties, not necessarily between
proponents and opponents of the report.
A point of order may be made against a conference report at any time that it is pending on the
Senate floor (or after all time for debate has expired or has been yielded back if the report is
considered under a time agreement). If a point of order is sustained against a conference report on
the grounds that conferees exceeded their authority, either by violating the “scope” rule (Rule
XXVIII) or the prohibition against “new directed spending provisions” (paragraph 8 of Rule
XLIV), then there is a special procedure to strike out the offending portion(s) of the conference
recommendation and continue consideration of the rest of the proposed compromise.4
Under the procedure, a Senator can make a point of order against one or more provisions of a
conference report. If the point of order is not waived (see below), the presiding officer rules
whether or not the provision is in violation of the rule. If a point of order is raised against more
than one provision, the presiding officer may make separate decisions regarding each provision.
After all points of order raised under this procedure are disposed of, the Senate proceeds to
consider a motion to send to the House, in place of the original conference agreement, a proposal
consisting of the text of the conference agreement minus the provisions that were ruled out of
order and stricken. Amendments to this motion are not in order, and debate is limited only if it
had been limited on the conference report. In short, the terms for consideration of the motion to
send to the House the proposal without the offending provisions are the same as those that would
have applied to the conference report itself.
If the Senate agrees to the motion, the altered conference recommendation is returned to the
House in the form of an amendment between the houses. The House then has an opportunity to
act on the amendment under the regular House procedures for considering Senate amendments
discussed in earlier sections of this report.
Senate rules also create a mechanism for waiving these restrictions on conference reports.
Senators can move to waive points of order against one or several provisions, or they can make
one motion to waive all possible points of order under either Rule XXVIII or Rule XLIV,
paragraph 8. If the motion to waive garners the necessary support, the Senate is effectively
agreeing to keep the matter that is potentially in violation of the rule in the conference report.
In the House, the conference report cannot be considered unless it has been available in the
Congressional Record or on the House document repository website for 72 hours. Copies of the
report and the statement must also be available to Representatives for at least two hours before
they consider it. These availability requirements are sometimes waived by a rule reported by the
Rules Committee, and they do not apply during the last six days of a session. Typically, the House
calls up a conference report under the terms of a special rule that protects the report against one or
more points of order if the Rules Committee reports and the House adopts a resolution waiving
the applicable rules.
The House debates a conference report under the one-hour rule, with control of the hour equally
divided between the two parties. However, if both floor managers support the report, a
Representative opposed to it may claim one-third of the time for debate. At the end of the first
hour, the House normally votes to order the previous question, which precludes additional debate.
If Representatives could make points of order against a report, sometimes the House first

4 For more information, see CRS Report RS22733, Senate Rules Restricting the Content of Conference Reports, by
Elizabeth Rybicki.
Congressional Research Service

7

Conference Committee and Related Procedures: An Introduction

considers and agrees to a resolution, recommended by its Rules Committee, that protects the
report by waiving the points of order.
Conference reports are not amendable. Each report is a compromise proposal for resolving a
series of disagreements; the House prevails on some questions, the Senate on others. If the House
and Senate were free to amend the report, they might never reach agreement. At the end of
debate, therefore, each house votes on whether to agree to the report as a whole. However, the
house that considers the report first also has the option of recommitting it to conference. But
when one chamber acts on the report, it automatically discharges its conferees. As a result, the
other house cannot vote to recommit, because the conference committee has been disbanded.
If the House and Senate agree to the conference report, the bill is enrolled (printed on parchment
in its final form) and presented to the President for his approval or disapproval.
Additional Resources
The report is based upon the original author’s interpretation of the rules and published precedents
of the two houses and an analysis of the application of these rules and precedents in recent
practice (see “Acknowledgements”). Readers may wish to study the provisions of House and
Senate rules and examine the applicable precedents—especially in the sections on “Senate Bills,”
“Amendments Between the Houses,” and “Conferences Between the Houses”—in House
Practice: A Guide to the Rules, Precedents and Procedures of the House and the corresponding
sections on “Amendments Between Houses” and “Conferences and Conference Reports” in
Riddick’s Senate Procedure (Senate Document No. 101-28). There is also more detailed
information on this subject in CRS Report 98-696, Resolving Legislative Differences in Congress:
Conference Committees and Amendments Between the Houses, and CRS Report R41003,
Amendments Between the Houses: Procedural Options and Effects.

Author Information

Elizabeth Rybicki

Specialist on Congress and the Legislative Process

Acknowledgments
This report was written by Stanley Bach, formerly a Senior Specialist in the Legislative Process at CRS.
The analyst now listed as the author has updated the report and is available to congressional clients to
answer questions on the topic.
Congressional Research Service

8

Conference Committee and Related Procedures: An Introduction

Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan
shared staff to congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and
under the direction of Congress. Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other
than public understanding of information that has been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in
connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the United States Government, are not
subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be reproduced and distributed in
its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include copyrighted images or
material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you wish to
copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.

Congressional Research Service
96-708 · VERSION 18 · UPDATED
9

Download PDF

Download EPUB

Revision History

May. 21, 2021

HTML · PDF

6% changed

May. 22, 2019

HTML · PDF

1% changed

Apr. 2, 2018

HTML · PDF

6% changed