motions

[Guest Shelby]

Can someone object to a motion? If so, under what circumstances or on what grounds can they object?

More specifically, if one person makes a motion to reconsider a previously approved budget, can another person object to and STOP (actually halt the process of seconding and voting on) the motion. The excuse for objecting to/stopping the motion was that the budget had already been passed two minutes before. There was also disagreement as to whether the motion had actually passed and discussion had been completed before the vote taken.

Is it a point of order where the person objecting is out of line for objecting to another person's motion because they just don't like it? Is the Chair obligated to allow all motions to get presented and heard?

Thanks for your reply.

[Josh Martin]

Can someone object to a motion? If so, under what circumstances or on what grounds can they object?

The phrase "object to a motion" could refer to several different possibilities, and the circumstances/grounds for each differ considerably:

• A member may raise a Point of Order if he believes a rule of the assembly is being violated. In most cases, such a point must be raised at the time of the breach. The President then rules on the point, and his ruling is subject to appeal.
• A member may raise an Objection to the Consideration of the Question, if he believes that even discussing the motion would be damaging to the society. Such an objection must be raised before debate has begun and it may only be applied to an original main motion. It takes a 2/3 vote to block consideration of a motion, and OTC is not debatable.
• If there is a request for unanimous consent, a member may raise an objection for any reason, which forces a formal vote on the motion.

More specifically, if one person makes a motion to reconsider a previously approved budget, can another person object to and STOP (actually halt the process of seconding and voting on) the motion.

Yes, but this would only halt consideration until the Point of Order and any subsequent Appeal where settled.

The excuse for objecting to/stopping the motion was that the budget had already been passed two minutes before. There was also disagreement as to whether the motion had actually passed and discussion had been completed before the vote taken.

The President should rule on the Point of Order. Based on the facts presented, I would rule it not well taken. The member's complaint about the two minutes appears to be a suggestion that the motion is dilatory, however, the chair should generally give members the benefit of the doubt in judging whether a motion is made in good faith. It is too late to raise a Point of Order about whether debate ended early or the result of the motion. Since a new motion has been stated by the chair, the chair's declaration of the result of the previous motion stands.

Is it a point of order where the person objecting is out of line for objecting to another person's motion because they just don't like it?

Well, certainly the chair should rule a Point of Order not well taken if the only reasoning the member can present is "I don't like it." The President should, however, assume good faith on the part of the member raising the Point of Order and rule on what the member actually says rather than what he may suspect about the member's motives.

Is the Chair obligated to allow all motions to get presented and heard?

No. If a motion is out of order, the chair is obligated to rule it out of order.

[Sean Hunt]

Can someone object to a motion? If so, under what circumstances or on what grounds can they object?

More specifically, if one person makes a motion to reconsider a previously approved budget, can another person object to and STOP (actually halt the process of seconding and voting on) the motion. The excuse for objecting to/stopping the motion was that the budget had already been passed two minutes before. There was also disagreement as to whether the motion had actually passed and discussion had been completed before the vote taken.

Is it a point of order where the person objecting is out of line for objecting to another person's motion because they just don't like it? Is the Chair obligated to allow all motions to get presented and heard?

Thanks for your reply.

A person can make a Point of Order that a motion is out of order, in which case the chair rules on it and, if the motion is found to be out of order, is not considered. A Point of Order should not be made simply because a motion is not liked by a member, and the chair has to uphold members' rights to make motions that not all may agree with. A member can, however, immediately after a motion is moved but before debate is started, move an Objection to the Consideration of the Question. This is undebateable and requires a two-thirds majority; if adopted, the first motion is not considered.

As for the motion to Reconsider, in order to prevent dilatory uses, it must be moved by someone who voted with the prevailing side - in this case, by someone who voted for the budget.

However, if there is a lack of clarity as to whether the first motion was adopted, that should be cleared up first. If the chair put it to a vote before debate was order, a Point of Order needed to be raised at that time and the vote is not affected. Likewise, if no Point of Order was raised after the chair's announcement of whether the motion passed or failed, then whatever the chair stated at the time holds, regardless of the actual outcome of the vote.

[Rob Elsman]

Can someone object to a motion? If so, under what circumstances or on what grounds can they object?

More specifically, if one person makes a motion to reconsider a previously approved budget, can another person object to and STOP (actually halt the process of seconding and voting on) the motion. The excuse for objecting to/stopping the motion was that the budget had already been passed two minutes before. There was also disagreement as to whether the motion had actually passed and discussion had been completed before the vote taken.

Is it a point of order where the person objecting is out of line for objecting to another person's motion because they just don't like it? Is the Chair obligated to allow all motions to get presented and heard?

Thanks for your reply.

"Just don't like it" is not sufficient grounds for a successful Point of Order that a motion to Reconsider is inadmissible.