Withdrawing a second

[Guest Tom]

Is it acceptable for once a motion is made and seconded, for the second to be withdrawn prior to the vote? Or must the vote then take place?

[Bruce Lages]

Once discussion on a motion has begun, the presence or absence of a second is no longer a factor. So, although the seconder can certainly speak against the motion at any time, withdrawing a second before the vote would be a meaningless act.

[Tim Wynn]

Is it acceptable for once a motion is made and seconded, for the second to be withdrawn prior to the vote? Or must the vote then take place?

The second is to let the chair know that the motion must be placed before the assembly for consideration. Since that has already happened in your example, the time has past. It would be like calling to cancel your skydiving trip while you're in the middle of your free fall (or, even worse, calling to order a parachute).

[Rev Ed]

And remember that both the mover and the seconder can vote against the motion as they are simply stating that they wish a decision to be made on the issue. The only restriction is that the mover cannot speak against the motion.

[Robert B Fish]

...the mover can vote against the motion as they are simply stating that they wish a decision to be made on the issue. ...

If the mover does not favor the motion, he/she should offer a motion that he DOES favor. If I am against holding the annual dinner/dance this year on the first Friday in December, I could move to have a different type activity at that time. I could move to have the dinner/dance at a different date. I could move to amend the annual budget to delete all funds for the annual December activity. I could move to refer the planning of the December activities to a committee with instructions to _____. Etc.

If it is apparent the mover does not favor the motion he's making, the chairman shold instruct him/her to offer a motion he favors or ask that he not waste the assembly's time.

-Bob

[Rev Ed]

While I concur that this is how it should happen, one needs to remember that a member may want a decision made and may not want another option. For example, if the member does not want an event to occur in December, he/she may move the motion in order to get the motion defeated thus making a decision. And in some cases it is either a "yes" or "no" decision, not a "yes", "no", or "____" option. And motions should be worded in the affirmative and not the negative.

[Tim Wynn]

While I concur that this is how it should happen, one needs to remember that a member may want a decision made and may not want another option. For example, if the member does not want an event to occur in December, he/she may move the motion in order to get the motion defeated thus making a decision. And in some cases it is either a "yes" or "no" decision, not a "yes", "no", or "____" option. And motions should be worded in the affirmative and not the negative.

Are you saying if he didn't make the motion and encourage the assembly to vote against it, the event wouldn't have occurred, anyway? If so, it sounds like making the motion is pointless. If not, it sounds like the member is moving to rescind a scheduled event or otherwise take action to prevent an event from occurring. Both would dictate that he vote for the motion to accomplish the desired effect.

[Josh Martin]

And remember that both the mover and the seconder can vote against the motion as they are simply stating that they wish a decision to be made on the issue. The only restriction is that the mover cannot speak against the motion.

While I concur that this is how it should happen, one needs to remember that a member may want a decision made and may not want another option. For example, if the member does not want an event to occur in December, he/she may move the motion in order to get the motion defeated thus making a decision. And in some cases it is either a "yes" or "no" decision, not a "yes", "no", or "____" option. And motions should be worded in the affirmative and not the negative.

Rev Ed, while it is true that in some cases a member will second a motion because he wishes the society to go on record against it, it would be highly unusual for someone to make a motion he does not support. A motion maker voting against his motion is more likely to happen because he changed his mind during debate.

As for your particular example, I think the member's strategy is questionable. It would be better for him to wait and see what happens. If no one makes a motion to have an event in December, he's good to go. If someone else makes a motion to have an event in December, he can speak against the motion and attempt to defeat it. If he makes the motion, then he risks the possibility of the motion being adopted and he can't speak against it. There also seems to be no benefit in "thus making a decision" in this way, since the motion may be reconsidered at the same meeting or simply renewed at a later meeting, so it's not much of a parliamentary maneuver.