Committee reviews proposal to let sponsors administratively abandon numbered house bills

Representative Thurston proposed a house rule to let a chief sponsor administratively abandon a numbered House bill by submitting an in‑person form to the House chief clerk, who would then record the action and, if the bill was in the Senate, request the Senate return the bill to the House. Thurston said the process would be a faster alternative to the current mechanism of ‘‘striking the enacting clause’’ on the floor, which requires motions and floor time. “You fill out a form and you speak with the house clerk personally … and then the presiding authority announces that the following bill has been abandoned,” he said. Supporters, including Representative Perucci, said the change would reduce clutter on the calendar and help sponsors who want to halt a bill that has become contentious or that they do not intend to pursue. Representative Dunnegan suggested a sunset or pilot to test the process. Opponents raised constitutional and process concerns. Senator Filmore said a single legislator ought not to be able to undo an action taken by the full body: “Every action, once a bill is numbered, everything that happens to that bill is done by the will of the entire legislative body,” he said, arguing the proposal could improperly let one legislator override committee or floor votes. The committee discussed whether the House can require the Senate to return a bill and how the action would appear in the bill status record; staff said the chief clerk would document the request and that the bill status would reflect the strike/enacting clause action. The committee did not adopt the rule. Members suggested alternatives (for example, allowing a sponsor to withdraw as chief sponsor or a joint rule change) and requested further legal review of cross‑chamber implications before pursuing a final rule change.