THE UNFUNDED MANDATE POINT OF ORDER

Overview

The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) sets forth requirements for committees and the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) to study and report on the magnitude and impact of federal mandates proposed in legislation. UMRA also establishes points of order against the consideration of legislation if it contains unfunded intergovernmental federal mandates exceeding $50 million, or if a committee, when reporting a bill or joint resolution, fails to include in either the committee report or the Congressional Record a statement from CBO estimating the direct costs of any mandates contained in the legislation. Under UMRA, congressional committees have the initial responsibility to identify federal mandates in measures under consideration. When an authorizing committee reports a measure containing a federal mandate, it must include in its committee report a CBO estimate of the costs of the mandate or have the estimate printed in the Congressional Record.

Disposing of Points of Order in the House

In disposing of points of order, the chair will put to the House or the Committee of the Whole, the "question of consideration with respect to the proposition that is the subject of the point of order." The question of consideration is subject to 20 minutes of debate with respect to each point of order-- 10 minutes by the Member initiating the point of order and 10 minutes by an opponent. At the conclusion of debate on the questions of consideration, the Members will vote on whether to proceed with consideration of the legislation.

If the Rules Committee reports a rule that waives UMRA points of order, consideration of that rule is subject to a point of order. Such a point of order is disposed of in the same manner as a point of order against consideration of the legislation in question.

UMRA also amended clause 11 of House Rule XVIII (which was further modified by H.Res. 5 at the beginning of the 105th Congress). Clause 11(a) of House Rule XVIII states that motions to strike an unfunded intergovernmental mandate are always in order in the House, unless the rule is specifically waived by the Rules Committee. Neither a rule restricting amendments nor one waiving all points of order is sufficient to preclude a motion to strike an unfunded intergovernmental mandate unless the rule specifically waives clause 11(a) of House Rule XVIII.

The Mandate Point of Order In Practice

MEMBER. “Mr. Chairman, pursuant to section 425 of the Congressional Budget Act and Impoundment Control Act of 1974, I make a point of order against consideration of the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute to the bill, H.R. 2000. Section 425 states that a point of order lies against legislation which either imposes an unfunded mandate in excess of $50 million annually against State or local governments, or when the committee chairman does not publish, prior to floor consideration, a CBO cost estimate of any unfunded mandate in excess of $50 million annually for State and local entities or in excess of $100 million annually for the private sector. Sections 100 and 200, on pages 10 through 20 of the amendment in the nature of a substitute to H.R. 2000, contain violations of section 425 of the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act. Therefore, I make a point of order against consideration of this amendment.”

THE CHAIR. “The gentleman from Georgia makes a point of order that the amendment in the nature of a substitute violates section 425(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974. In accordance with section 426(b)(2) of the act, the gentleman has met his threshold burden to identify the specific language in the amendment on which he predicates the point of order. Under section 426(b)(4) of the act, the gentleman from Georgia and a Member opposed to the point of order each will control 10 minutes of debate on the question of consideration.” Pursuant to section 426(b)(3) of the act, after debate on the question of consideration, the Chair will put the question to wit: “Will the Committee now consider the amendment?”

“The gentleman from Georgia is recognized for 10 minutes, and the gentleman from New York who is opposed, will be recognized for 10 minutes. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Georgia.”

(After 20 cumulative minutes of debate on the question of consideration)

THE CHAIR. “All time on this question has expired.” Pursuant to section 426(b)(3) of the Act, the question is, “Will the Committee now consider the amendment in the nature of a substitute?” The question was put to the Committee; and the Chairman announced that the noes appear to have it.

MEMBER. “Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.”