Laying on the table

[Guest Victor Zapana]

I am a Washington Post reporter who is working on a deadline story. Can a legislative body lay a bill on the table (referenced on P. 209) if it does not believe enough data is available to justify a vote?

[J. J.]

Assuming the legislative body uses RONR, and the majority technically regards other business as needing to be addressed, it would be in order v(p. 20 l26-30). It should not be qualified in any way, but the fact that its qualified to not having enough data would not, in my opinion, render it out of order. It cannot be used to defeat, or "kill," a main motion (p. 210, ll. 5-14)

[Guest Edgar]

Can a legislative body lay a bill on the table (referenced on P. 209) if it does not believe enough data is available to justify a vote?

See FAQ #12.

But note that many legislative bodies (e.g. Congress) operate under their own customized rules, not RONR.

[Josh Martin]

I am a Washington Post reporter who is working on a deadline story. Can a legislative body lay a bill on the table (referenced on P. 209) if it does not believe enough data is available to justify a vote?

So far as RONR is concerned, an assembly may not lay a motion on the table on the basis that not enough data is available to justify a vote (unless, as J. J. suggests, the assembly's true goal is to reach some other item business and this fact is incidental). (RONR, 11th ed., pg. 215, lines 13-15) Depending on the circumstances, either the motion to Postpone Indefinitely, to Postpone to a Certain Time, or to Commit might be the appropriate course of action.

However, before you run off to the presses, keep in mind that many legislative bodies (especially at the state or federal level) do not use RONR as their parliamentary authority and/or have extensive special rules of order, which supersede the parliamentary authority. See, for instance, RONR, 11th ed., pg. 215, footnote for a brief discussion of the use of Lay on the Table in the US House of Representatives.

[J. J.]

So far as RONR is concerned, an assembly may not lay a motion on the table on the basis that not enough data is available to justify a vote (unless, as J. J. suggests, the assembly's true goal is to reach some other item business and this fact is incidental). (RONR, 11th ed., pg. 215, lines 13-15) Depending on the circumstances, either the motion to Postpone Indefinitely, to Postpone to a Certain Time, or to Commit might be the appropriate course of action.

Actually, the maker of the motion would not be required to express that.

[Josh Martin]

Actually, the maker of the motion would not be required to express that.

What do you mean?

[Trina]

What do you mean?

Ditto. I can't figure out what it is that the maker of the motion is not required to express.

[J. J.]

Actually, the maker of the motion would not be required to express that.

The maker of the motion would not be required to express the reason for moving to lay the question on the table.

[Josh Martin]

The maker of the motion would not be required to express the reason for moving to lay the question on the table.

Right, thanks for the clarification. I suspect I was thinking of the rule that the motion is not in order if there is evidently no other business requiring immediate attention, but I can see how my post may have implied that the chair is expected to interrogate the member as to his purpose (which is not the case).

[J. J.]

Right, thanks for the clarification. I suspect I was thinking of the rule that the motion is not in order if there is evidently no other business requiring immediate attention, but I can see how my post may have implied that the chair is expected to interrogate the member as to his purpose (which is not the case).

Well, if the majority agrees to lay the motion on the table, they regard the motion as being of less urgency that other business.

[Dan Honemann]

The maker of the motion would not be required to express the reason for moving to lay the question on the table.

What about page 211, lines 30-35?

[jstackpo]

What about page 211, lines 30-35?

The chair is not required to ask any more than is the maker of the motion is required to explain, although, if asked, the maker would certainly be expected to respond.