Guest Edward Posted July 25, 2012 at 04:46 PM Report Share Posted July 25, 2012 at 04:46 PM A motion failed in committee by a vote of 3-3. Is there anyway it can still be brought before the entire assembly? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Wynn Posted July 25, 2012 at 04:58 PM Report Share Posted July 25, 2012 at 04:58 PM A motion failed in committee by a vote of 3-3. Is there anyway it can still be brought before the entire assembly?Well, any member of the assembly can make the motion, so if the three committee members who voted for it are members of the assembly and want to see it come before the assembly, they have that right.Also, a minority report could be drafted, but I prefer that a member just make the motion in the assembly.See RONR (11th ed.), p. 527, l. 2 - p. 529, l. 9. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Harrison Posted July 25, 2012 at 04:59 PM Report Share Posted July 25, 2012 at 04:59 PM Yes, after the Committee has made its report or is discharged from further consideration of the matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Edgar Posted July 25, 2012 at 05:06 PM Report Share Posted July 25, 2012 at 05:06 PM Well, any member of the assembly can make the motion, so if the three committee members who voted for it are members of the assembly and want to see it come before the assembly, they have that right.Would the dissenting members have to wait until the committee made its report? That is, can a dissenting member bring a question before the general assembly before the committee (to which the question has presumably been assigned) has done so? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Wynn Posted July 25, 2012 at 05:22 PM Report Share Posted July 25, 2012 at 05:22 PM Would the dissenting members have to wait until the committee made its report? That is, can a dissenting member bring a question before the general assembly before the committee (to which the question has presumably been assigned) has done so?There is an assumption hidden in parentheses somewhere in your question, and that facts surrounding that assumption make all the difference in the world. While a specific question is in the hands of a committee, the same question or one that would conflict with it would not be in order in the assembly. However, we don't know the details. The motion that was lost in the committee could have been generated in the committee as a recommendation. In that case, the fact that the committee considered the recommendation and voted against it does not prevent the assembly from considering the question, unless the committee has been given some control over the subject matter. It was my assumption that guest_Edward was referring to a recommendation from the committee. For clarity, it should be pointed out that additional details may be needed to arrive at a more helpful and complete answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Edgar Posted July 25, 2012 at 05:28 PM Report Share Posted July 25, 2012 at 05:28 PM There is an assumption hidden in parentheses somewhere in your question, and that facts surrounding that assumption make all the difference in the world.Parentheses? Actually, it was a pretty straightforward question and one that was answered by Mr. H. while I was struggling with the CAPTCHA code.Though I will say that the fact the motion referred to was defeated by a tie vote led me to think it was not about the final recommendation (or report) of the committee. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Wynn Posted July 25, 2012 at 05:53 PM Report Share Posted July 25, 2012 at 05:53 PM I don't see any way of safely assuming that a motion that was lost in a committee had been referred to the committee. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Edgar Posted July 25, 2012 at 10:00 PM Report Share Posted July 25, 2012 at 10:00 PM I don't see any way of safely assuming that a motion that was lost in a committee had been referred to the committee.That's not what I'm suggesting and I apologize for any confusion. I assumed (?) that the motion that resulted in a tie was a relatively minor motion that came up in the ordinary business of the committee. In other words, following its defeat the committee went on with its business (whether as a standing committee or a special committee in the process of preparing a report). But the dissenting members thought it was important enough that it should come up before the general assembly (rather than die a quiet death in committee). Any my question simply related to the timing of this "second chance". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Wynn Posted July 25, 2012 at 11:07 PM Report Share Posted July 25, 2012 at 11:07 PM That's not what I'm suggesting and I apologize for any confusion. I assumed (?) that the motion that resulted in a tie was a relatively minor motion that came up in the ordinary business of the committee. In other words, following its defeat the committee went on with its business (whether as a standing committee or a special committee in the process of preparing a report). But the dissenting members thought it was important enough that it should come up before the general assembly (rather than die a quiet death in committee). Any my question simply related to the timing of this "second chance".As long as the question is not in the hands of the committee, it can be considered in the assembly (provided that it is not otherwise out of order, of course).The fact that the committee considered the motion on its own would not make it "in the hands of the committee." See RONR (11th ed.), p. 311, ll. 3-5. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.