Dual Uses - Point of Order and Call for the Orders of the Day

[parkourninja]

If the presiding officer skips over a particular order of business or item of agenda, would it be OK to raise attention to that error by raising a point of order or should a member always use "call for the orders of the day"?

[Richard Brown]

I suppose either method will work, but if the chair actually skipped an item, I believe a point of order is the more appropriate motion.

[Shmuel Gerber]

If the presiding officer skips over a particular order of business or item of agenda, would it be OK to raise attention to that error by raising a point of order or should a member always use "call for the orders of the day"?

 

Since RONR explicitly states that one of the purposes of a Call for the Orders of the Day is to remedy the possibility that the chair "may skip an item in the order of business by mistake" (RONR, 11th ed., p. 220, ll. 1-2), that is the appropriate motion to use, not a Point of Order. If a member is not familiar with the procedure for calling for the orders of the day and instead raises a Point of Order, the chair may treat it as any other instance in which a member uses the incorrect motion, and handle it as a Call for the Orders of the Day.

 

The difference is that when a member raises a Point of Order, the chair must rule on the point, or put it to the assembly when in doubt; and even when the question of order is put to the assembly, the question is not what the assembly wants to do, but what the rules require being done.

 

By contrast, in the case where an item in the order of business has been skipped (or any other occasion in which a Call for the Orders of the Day is appropriate), the chair may take the initiative in putting the question to the assembly whether or not to proceed to the orders of the day, and the assembly has the right to set aside the orders of the day by a two-thirds vote.

[Richard Brown]

Since RONR explicitly states that one of the purposes of a Call for the Orders of the Day is to remedy the possibility that the chair "may skip an item in the order of business by mistake" (RONR, 11th ed., p. 220, ll. 1-2), that is the appropriate motion to use, not a Point of Order. If a member is not familiar with the procedure for calling for the orders of the day and instead raises a Point of Order, the chair may treat it as any other instance in which a member uses the incorrect motion, and handle it as a Call for the Orders of the Day.

Thanks for the correct answer.... you are right. I shoulda looked it up.   And  should've known even without looking it up!

[Shmuel Gerber]

Actually, on further thought, a Point of Order would be appropriate if the chair purposely skips an item on the agenda -- for example, in the belief that the agenda is different than it actually is. In other words, a Call for the Orders of the Day is the motion to use when there is no disagreement as to what the order of business actually is, but a Point of Order is the motion to use when there is such disagreement.

Obviously, members should not be expected to read the chair's state of mind, so normally a Call for the Orders of the Day would still be the motion to begin with in most cases.