Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

Reconsider Motion to Commit


CDNBlue

Recommended Posts

I'm unclear as to what the following means in practice:

"A negative vote on the motion to Commit can be reconsidered only until such time as progress in business or debate has been sufficient to make it essentially a new question. Thereafter, the motion can be renewed (see pp. 339–40)." - RONR (11th ed.) at 171. (emphasis added).

Any ideas or examples of when you've seen this used?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I posted an answer a couple of minutes ago but deleted it because I'm not sure it was accurate.  I don't recall having seen that rule invoked.

Are you asking for an explanation of what the rule means?  Do you have a particular situation in mind?   I think you have asked a very good question and I don't have a good answer for you right now.  I do suppose, by way of example, that if the motion gets amended during debate, that might be sufficient to "make it essentially a new question".   RAs to whether debate alone can do that, I don't know. 

I would like some enlightenment, too.  :)

Edited to add: keep checking back . Others will probably chime in. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Hieu H. Huynh said:

At the same meeting, the same question cannot be renewed, but can be reconsidered. Is it the same question?

But if you continue debating the main motion for a "while", the motion to commit the main motion can be renewed right away - same meeting.

I suppose that continuing to debate, in effect, transmogrifies the previously defeated motion to commit into a "new question".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suggest a careful reading of Section 38 in RONR (11th ed.).

Determination as to whether or not progress in business or debate has been such that a motion to commit will be a substantially different question from the same motion previously rejected requires the use of judgment and common sense (just as, for example, does determination of the germaneness of an amendment). 

It may be a determination that is easy to make. For example, the motion may have been materially amended since the motion to commit was rejected. Or it may be more difficult to make if it is a question as to whether or not renewal of the motion to commit presents a different question, as a practical matter, from the one previously rejected simply as a result of the debate which has taken place since the previous motion to commit was rejected. But even in this instance it may not be too difficult. For example, I suspect that if the first motion to commit was made and rejected after five minutes of debate, the same motion may most likely be made again after another hour or more of debate has taken place. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you very much for your replies. I'm just learning Robert's Rules and didn't particularly understand the passage (above) in the abstract. I don't have a particular situation in mind. I think that's what may be causing the most problems for me in interpreting the text.

I think the ambiguity I see can be separated into two parts. 1) Does the 'essentially a new question' refer specifically and solely to the motion to commit?; and 2) How can debate itself ever make anything 'essentially a new question'?

1) I think it does refer specifically to the original motion to commit but I'm not entirely certain. 

2) I'm more confused as to where the 'line' is. Say the main motion is for Xco. to purchase a new office building. There is a motion to commit to a special committee to study the matter. That motion to commit is defeated. Debate resumes. The motion to commit can be reconsidered at any time during the meeting until the criteria for the words of limitation ("until such time as progress in business or debate has been sufficient to make it essentially a new question") are met.

RONR says that the motion can be "reconsidered only until such time as progress in business OR debate has been sufficient to make it essentially a new question" (emphasis added). I don't see how debate alone can make anything 'essentially a new question', but RONR contemplates this scenario. As for the where the 'line' is, surely a debate that simply provides more information and clarifies the issue doesn't change the question, it would just change opinions on whether the motion ought to be adopted or defeated. Something more would seem to be required, but what does 'something more' look like?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, CDNBlue said:

I get that desirability may be different, but how does that render the question 'essentially new'? The question would still be on whether to adopt the motion to commit to the special committee. Desirability speaks to the assembly's answer to that question rather than an 'essentially new question', doesn't it?

Yes, but the additional debate on the main motion may have caused such a substantial change in the circumstances in which the desirability of referral will be considered that the renewed motion to commit will not present the same question as a practical matter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here are examples of possible changes to the item of business which will likely convince the majority of the members that the the old status and new status of the main motion is different:

• Amendment(s).

The main motion might have contained X, but after amendments, contains X, Y, Z.

• To save meeting time.

A main motion might have been debated for 30 minutes or 60 minutes, and so the PURPOSE of the motion To Commit has changed (from "study" to "get rid of it!").
This a managerial consideration, or a psychological consideration.
It isn't the motion itself which has changed, but the minds of the members. -- A motion To Commit moved at 8:05 p.m. on the night of a meeting does not have the same urgency as that the identical motion To Commit would at midnight.

• Cost.

The treasurer might have spoken in debate, saying that the organization cannot afford to execute/fulfill the main motion.
Thus the main motion is no condition to be adopted.
Thus someone must figure out what to do to modify the main motion.

***

Remember, sometimes the main motion's wording will not have changed.

Only the mind set of the members have changed.

And that is a judgment call. Who decides? A majority vote of the members.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...