This is not a proper ruling. It did not constitute debate. It was simply a unanimous consent request, and I do not believe this is a proper ruling of the Chair. The SPEAKER pro tempore. As the Chair ruled earlier today, it is not in order to embellish a unanimous consent request with debate. When such a request extends into debate, the yielding Member is charged. In the opinion of the Chair, the request of the gentleman from North Carolina contained debate. The point of order is overruled.
Share
More from Melvin Watt
I thank the gentleman for yielding once again. And in response to my colleague from Virginia (Mr. Goodlatte), we have in fact been trying to work out our differences. The problem is that his definition of protecting privacy is not as…
Later this week, the United States Senate is scheduled to consider the President's nomination of Richard Cordray as the person to head the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. And while our rules don't allow us to meddle much in the…
I appeal the ruling of the Chair. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is, Shall the decision of the Chair stand in the judgment of the House? Motion to Table
I thank the gentleman for yielding. Of course I'm not from Virginia, I'm from North Carolina, but that happens to me and Bobby Scott all the time. We get confused with each other, States and personalities, because we sit beside each other…





