Commander AMVETS Post 312

[Guest Ron Larrivee]

A motion was made to construct a separate attached facility for smokers. The motion was 2nded and the members approved it with no nays.

Question is : The Commander did NOT restate the motion before the vote. Is the motion illegal or legal? 

[Richard Brown]

"Legal".  But, I prefer to say "it was adopted".  The failure of the chair to properly restate the motion is something that would have to have been objected to with a timely point of order.  Failure to make a timely objection does not affect the adoption of the motion.

[Guest Ron]

19 minutes ago, Richard Brown said:

"Legal".  But, I prefer to say "it was adopted".  The failure of the chair to properly restate the motion is something that would have to have been objected to with a timely point of order.  Failure to make a timely objection does not affect the adoption of the motion.

Thank you Richard. Can you tell me where I would find this answer in the book?

[Richard Brown]

13 minutes ago, Guest Ron said:

Thank you Richard. Can you tell me where I would find this answer in the book?

The section that comes to mind is on page 250, as follows:

"TIMELINESS REQUIREMENT FOR A POINT OF ORDER. If a question of order is to be raised, it must be raised promptly at the time the breach occurs. For example, if the chair is stating the question on a motion that has not been seconded, or on a motion that is out of order in the existing parliamentary situation, the time to raise these points of order is when the chair states the motion. After debate on such a motion has begun—no matter how clearly out of order the motion may be—a point of order is too late. If a member is unsure of his point or wishes to hear what the maker has to say on behalf of the motion before pressing a point of order, he may, with the chair's sufferance, "reserve a point of order" against the motion; but after the maker has spoken, he must insist upon his point of order or withdraw it. Points of order regarding the conduct of a vote must be raised immediately [page 251] following the announcement of the voting result (see pp. 408–9).

There may well be other sections of the book that cover this.  You can also probably find many threads about it in this forum.  Minor breaches or order of that type must be objected to immediately, at the time of the breach by raising a point of order or they are deemed waived. 

Failure of the chair to state the motion is likewise waived once debate ensues, as long as it is clear what is being debated and voted on.
 

[Richard Brown]

Guest Ron, you might find more information in this thread from this forum.  Pay particular attention to the response by Mr. Honemann, which I believe is the third response.  Mr. Honemann is a member of the RONR authorship team.