Substitute Motion

[Mike V.]

If a main motion is pending, and an amendment has been offered and seconded, may a substitute motion (for the main motion) be offered? If so, should the amendment to the main motion be disposed of first, before the substitute is considered.

If an amendment to a main motion has been made, may a substitue to that amendment be offered.

I am confused by RONR, page 153, lines 31 - page 154, line 3.

Thank you.

[jstackpo]

Confused? So are we all, from time to time.

If the sequence of events is Main Motion, Amendment to Main that is not a "substitute" or replacement of (big chunks of or all of) the Main Motion by new text, then a real substitute for the Main Motion is not in order at that time. Take care of the (simple) amendment first. Then offer the Substitute.

If the sequence is Main Motion, Substitute for Main Motion (a "primary amendment") then things do get a bit complicated. It is fair game to...

1) Make simple (word for word type) amendments to the Main Motion.

2) Make any kind of amendment to the Substitute Material.

1) and 2) are both varieties of "secondary amendments". You "do" 1) & 2) (in any order, but 1) first then 2) is a little easier to keep track of) until there are no more Secondary Amendments. Then you vote (after more discussion, if wanted) on adopting the Main Motion, or whatever is left of it after the 1) & 2) amendments are done with.

This is a very sketchy outline of the process. More necessary details are in that (huge) chapter in the book dealing with amendments.

Hope this helps.

[Mike V.]

J. D. Stackpole:

Thank you very much. This is quite helpful.

Mike V.

[Dan Honemann]

If a main motion is pending, and an amendment has been offered and seconded, may a substitute motion (for the main motion) be offered? If so, should the amendment to the main motion be disposed of first, before the substitute is considered.

If an amendment to a main motion has been made, may a substitue to that amendment be offered.

I am confused by RONR, page 153, lines 31 - page 154, line 3.

Thank you.

The short answer to your first question is "no".

There is no short answer to your last question, but suppose that, while main motion A is immediately pending, a motion is made to amend it by substituting B for it. It will then be in order to move to substitute C for B (although it will not be in order to move to substitute C for A). All of this is assuming that the rules relating to germaneness are being complied with.

[Guest Learning]

The short answer to your first question is "no".

There is no short answer to your last question, but suppose that, while main motion A is immediately pending, a motion is made to amend it by substituting B for it. It will then be in order to move to substitute C for B (although it will not be in order to move to substitute C for A). All of this is assuming that the rules relating to germaneness are being complied with.

Because the secondary amendment must be germane to the primary amendment?

[Tim Wynn]

Because the secondary amendment must be germane to the primary amendment?

Because the proposed amendment must be germane to the question it proposes to amend, regardless of the degree of the amendment.

[Dan Honemann]

Because the secondary amendment must be germane to the primary amendment?

If this incomplete sentence ending in a question mark is asking if the answers provided in post # 4 are what they are because of the need to comply with the rules relating to germaneness, the answer is "no". Those answers simply assume compliance with those rules in each instance, and are not based upon them.