Guest Tom

Debate after amendments

9 posts in this topic

If a main motion is amended and a member has used the maximum number of speeches in debate, does he then have the opportunity to debate the main motion again?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't believe he does. Each member may speak twice on each debatable motion, so if this person had exhausted his right to debate the main motion before the amendment was proposed, he still would have been able to speak up to two times specifically on the amendment. But once the amendment has been adopted, he cannot speak again on the main motion. See RONR, p. 388-389 for the section entitled "NUMBER OF SPEECHES ON THE SAME QUESTION PER MEMBER PER DAY".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The passage Mr. Lages cites speaks specifically to your question:

"Thus, if a series of debatable questions is pending and a member has, for example, spoken twice that day while the main motion is immediately pending, he has exhausted his right to debate the main motion; but, even on the same day, he can still speak twice on a motion to postpone the main question indefinitely, and twice on each amendment that may be moved, and so on."  RONR (11th ed.), p. 389

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay I thought that when the question was amended it is not the "same question" as the unamended main motion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Guest Tom said:

Okay I thought that when the question was amended it is not the "same question" as the unamended main motion.

If the member who has exhausted his right to debate the main motion (or main motion as amended) still opposes the motion after the amendments have been dealt with, he can move to postpone the main motion indefinitely if nothing else but the main motion is pending.

Why would he do that?

"Making this motion enables members who have exhausted their right of debate on the main question to speak further because, as explained under Standard Characteristic 5, the motion to Postpone Indefinitely, though technically a new question, necessarily involves debate of the main question."  RONR (11th ed.), p. 128

So all may not be lost for this chatty member. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The chatty member may also move to suspend the rules to allow him (or even all members) to speak again on the original main motion as amended. He might, for example, have originally been in favor of the motion but is now opposed to it as amended. Or vice versa. The motion to suspend the rules would require a two-thirds vote for adoption unless it is done without objection by unanimous consent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Richard Brown said:

The chatty member may also move to suspend the rules to allow him (or even all members) to speak again on the original main motion as amended. He might, for example, have originally been in favor of the motion but is now opposed to it as amended. Or vice versa. The motion to suspend the rules would require a two-thirds vote for adoption unless it is done without objection by unanimous consent.

Given the specifics of the situation, I'd think this would be a motion to Extend Limits of Debate rather than a motion to suspend the rules.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Richard Brown said:

The chatty member may also move to suspend the rules to allow him (or even all members) to speak again on the original main motion as amended. He might, for example, have originally been in favor of the motion but is now opposed to it as amended. Or vice versa. The motion to suspend the rules would require a two-thirds vote for adoption unless it is done without objection by unanimous consent.

I agree with Josh Martin regarding what motion it really is.  But if the member who can no longer debate the main motion (or main motion as amended) opposes the motion, it's probably easier to move to postpone indefinitely since all that's required is a second by another member and he can debate that motion, rather than hope he can garner a 2/3 vote to extend the limits of debate. If he favors the main motion, that's a different story.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another alternative, if the member is in favor of the main motion as amended, would be to move that the question be considered informally, which will require only a majority vote for its adoption.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   You have pasted content with formatting.   Remove formatting

  Only 75 emoticons maximum are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

Loading...