Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I offer a resolution raising a question of the privileges of the House.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman may give notice.

Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I give notice of this resolution and that it will be brought up as soon as the rules permit.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman must read the form of the resolution and then ask for unanimous consent.

Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, by the form, does the Speaker mean the text?

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman may ask unanimous consent to dispense with the reading.

Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I do not ask that unanimous consent.

Will the Clerk read the resolution?

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman must read the resolution.

Mr. NADLER. ``Whereas the Committee on the Judiciary conducted a markup of the bill H.R. 748, the ``Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act,'' on Wednesday, April 13, 2005, and ordered the bill reported on that same day;

Whereas the Committee on the Judiciary subsequently reported H.R. 748 to the House on Thursday, April 21, 2005, with an accompanying report designated House Report 109-51;

Whereas, during the markup of H.R. 748, Representatives Nadler, Scott, and Jackson-Lee offered in good faith a total of five amendments to the bill, all of which failed on party-line votes;

Whereas, because Representatives Nadler, Scott, and Jackson-Lee called for recorded votes on their amendments, under section 3(b) of Rule XIII, the votes were published in House Report 109-51;

Whereas, although it is the long and established practice in House reports to describe recorded votes with objective, nonargumentative captions, the Committee on the Judiciary majority departed from this practice in House Report 109-51 by captioning these five amendments with inflammatory, inaccurate captions;

Whereas, when Representative Sensenbrenner, the Chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary, was asked about this language and given the opportunity to correct it, both in the Committee Rules and on the House floor, he instead explained that it was his purpose and intention to include these derogatory and inaccurate captions in House Report 109-51;

Whereas, committee reports are official congressional documents to which American citizens will refer when seeking to interpret the bills they accompany;

Whereas, although the committee markup and reporting process gives Members ample opportunity to debate, characterize, and criticize each other's views, committees have a ministerial, institutional responsibility to accurately report the proceedings of committee activities;

Whereas, under the procedures of the Committee on the Judiciary, the minority must submit its dissenting views to the majority without having the opportunity to review the report;

Whereas, the majority has the opportunity to review the minority's dissent before filing its report;

Whereas, earlier versions of H.R. 748 were reported by the Committee on the Judiciary on three separate occasions and in each case, these amendments, or similar amendments, were described in these earlier committee reports with objective, nonargumentative captions;

Whereas, this unprecedented manipulation of a traditionally nonpartisan portion of a committee report constitutes an abuse of power by the majority of the Committee on the Judiciary;

Whereas, a report of a committee offers the majority and minority the opportunity to provide their views and interpretations of the legislation, amendments, and issues;

Whereas, the section of a committee report required by clause 3(b) of Rule XIII was purposely misused as an opportunity to comment on, or characterize, the amendments; and

Whereas the vote captions published in House Report 109-51 appear to be purposefully inaccurate and misleading, and reflect negatively on the integrity of the Members offering the amendments, and therefore belittle the dignity of the House and undermine the integrity of the proceedings of the House:

Now, therefore, be it:

Resolved, That the House of Representatives

(1) finds that the Committee on the Judiciary purposefully and deliberately mischaracterized the above-mentioned votes in House Report 109-51; and

(2) directs the chairman of such committee to report to the House a supplement to House Report 109-51 that corrects the record by describing the five amendments with nonargumentative, objective captions.''

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under rule IX, a resolution offered from the floor by a Member other than the majority leader or the minority leader as a question of the privileges of the House has immediate precedence only at a time designated by the Chair within 2 legislative days after the resolution is properly noticed.

Pending that designation, the form of the resolution noticed by the gentleman from New York (Mr. Nadler) will appear in the RECORD at this point.

The Chair will not at this point determine whether the resolution constitutes a question of privilege. That determination will be made at the time designated for consideration of the resolution.