Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

Adopt, Rescind and Reconsider


Recommended Posts

The meeting begins with a quorum, but less than a majority of the membership.

A main motion is adopted by a bare majority.

Later in the meeting, more members show up, a majority of the entire membership. All the recently arrived members all opposed the adopted motion. None of the members that voted in the affirmative will move to reconsider. One of the recently arrived members moves to rescind. There are enough votes for it to be adopted.

Rescind becomes pending. A member who voted in favor of the motion properly moves to reconsider, as per p. 317, ll. 23-4.

1. Is the motion to reconsider in order?

2. If so, does the motion to rescind become out of order?

3. If so, and the motion to reconsider is defeated, may rescind be renewed  properly made again in the same session?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 67
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I would guess that:

1. The making of the motion to reconsider is definitely in order, based on p. 317, ll. 21-23, but the actual consideration would not be in order at the same time, based on. p. 78, l.33 - p. 79, l.5.

2. Based on 1. above, I don't think the motion to rescind becomes out of order, and even if reconsider is adopted, again becomes the pending motion after the vote on reconsider.

3. Not applicable, if 1. and 2. above are correct.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I think I need to revise that answer 2. somewhat. I said that the motion to rescind would be pending even if the motion to reconsider were adopted, but in re-reading the p. 78-79 reference it seems clear that the motion to reconsider can only be made when any other motion is pending, but would not be taken up at that time if another motion is pending ("but its consideration has only the rank of the motion to be reconsidered" [p. 79, ll. 2-4] -which in this case is a main motion). I think the rest of point 2 above still stands, in that the motion to rescind is still the pending motion after the motion to reconsider has been made.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I think I need to revise that answer 2. somewhat. I said that the motion to rescind would be pending even if the motion to reconsider were adopted, but in re-reading the p. 78-79 reference it seems clear that the motion to reconsider can only be made when any other motion is pending, but would not be taken up at that time if another motion is pending ("but its consideration has only the rank of the motion to be reconsidered" [p. 79, ll. 2-4] -which in this case is a main motion). I think the rest of point 2 above still stands, in that the motion to rescind is still the pending motion after the motion to reconsider has been made.

And if the motion to rescind is adopted the motion to reconsider becomes moot. On the other hand if the motion to rescind is voted down the motion to reconsider can then be called up.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I think I need to revise that answer 2. somewhat. I said that the motion to rescind would be pending even if the motion to reconsider were adopted, but in re-reading the p. 78-79 reference it seems clear that the motion to reconsider can only be made when any other motion is pending, but would not be taken up at that time if another motion is pending ("but its consideration has only the rank of the motion to be reconsidered" [p. 79, ll. 2-4] -which in this case is a main motion). I think the rest of point 2 above still stands, in that the motion to rescind is still the pending motion after the motion to reconsider has been made.

You might want to look at p. 308, ll. 17-19.

If the motion to reconsider was made, and not called up prior to the motion to rescind being made, rescind would be out of order.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The meeting begins with a quorum, but less than a majority of the membership.

A main motion is adopted by a bare majority.

Later in the meeting, more members show up, a majority of the entire membership. All the recently arrived members all opposed the adopted motion. None of the members that voted in the affirmative will move to reconsider. One of the recently arrived members moves to rescind. There are enough votes for it to be adopted.

Rescind becomes pending. A member who voted in favor of the motion properly moves to reconsider, as per p. 317, ll. 23-4.

1. Is the motion to reconsider in order?

2. If so, does the motion to rescind become out of order?

3. If so, and the motion to reconsider is defeated, may rescind be renewed in the same session?

This is an interesting question(s). I may be missing some more obvious reason, but based on the principles governing SDC 2( b ) of the motion to Reconsider, and the rules on page 321, line 30 to page 322, line 12, I think the motion to Reconsider would not be in order.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is an interesting question(s). I may be missing some more obvious reason, but based on the principles governing SDC 2( b ) of the motion to Reconsider, and the rules on page 321, line 30 to page 322, line 12, I think the motion to Reconsider would not be in order.

That does make sense.

I would take it that, if Rescind was defeated, Reconsider would be in order?

Link to post
Share on other sites

So what? This still has absolutely nothing to do with the question you asked.

It might have provided some reference points to the answers, though I think Shmuel may have nailed it.

A motion to reconsider Motion X, made previously and not called up would act to block a motion to rescind Motion X, e.g. make a motion to rescind Motion X out of order, until reconsideration is disposed of. A motion to rescind Motion X would block a motion to reconsider Motion X, until rescind was disposed of, under this premise.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A motion to reconsider Motion X, made previously and not called up would act to block a motion to rescind Motion X, e.g. make a motion to rescind Motion X out of order, until reconsideration is disposed of. A motion to rescind Motion X would block a motion to reconsider Motion X, until rescind was disposed of, under this premise.

This reasoning makes no sense at all, since the one situation bears little, if any, relationship to the other. The time limits on making a motion to Reconsider have got to be taken into consideration.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This reasoning makes no sense at all, since the one situation bears little, if any, relationship to the other. The time limits on making a motion to Reconsider have got to be taken into consideration.

Actually, it does.

I knew that, if for some reason, someone wanted to block Rescind, Reconsider could be used. I thought one possibility would be that Rescind could end up blocking Reconsider, which has a time limit. It is an interesting relationship.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is an interesting question(s). I may be missing some more obvious reason, but based on the principles governing SDC 2( b ) of the motion to Reconsider, and the rules on page 321, line 30 to page 322, line 12, I think the motion to Reconsider would not be in order.

I guess I don't see how SDC 2( b ) relates to J.J.'s scenario. since it discusses reconsideration not being applicable to a negative vote on motions which would be out of order at the time reconsider is made, and there isn't a negative vote in this scenario. The reference to p. 321-322 also doesn't seem to fit since it discusses action that may preclude making of the motion to reconsider the vote on a previously rejected motion, and there is no previously rejected motion . What am I missing?

Shmuel's post did. however, make me think about SDC 2(g), which indicates that reconsider can not be applied "when practically the same result as desired can be obtained by some other parliamentary motion." Since the main motion in J.J.'s scenario was adopted, the presumed purpose of reconsider would be to now defeat that motion - but the same result could certainly be obtained by rescinding it. The technical questions that come to mind are 1) whether rescind, which in this situation would require (minimally) a majority the entire membership, is considered to be 'practically the same result' as reconsider, which could defeat the motion with just a majority vote; and 2) do the words "can be applied to the vote on any motion except... " in SDC 2 mean that reconsider can not be made in the excepted cases, or can not be considered in those cases?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess I don't see how SDC 2( b ) relates to J.J.'s scenario. since it discusses reconsideration not being applicable to a negative vote on motions which would be out of order at the time reconsider is made, and there isn't a negative vote in this scenario. The reference to p. 321-322 also doesn't seem to fit since it discusses action that may preclude making of the motion to reconsider the vote on a previously rejected motion, and there is no previously rejected motion . What am I missing?

The rules that I referred to do not specifically apply to the situation, but I am suggesting that it would make sense to apply the principles underlying those rules in a slightly broader way.

But before we get to that, there is a more basic question: Is it in order to reconsider the vote on a motion that has already been rescinded? I had been assuming that the answer is no.

Edited by Shmuel Gerber
Link to post
Share on other sites

The rules that I referred to do not specifically apply to the situation, but I am suggesting that it would make sense to apply the principles underlying those rules in a slightly broader way.

But before we get to that, there is a more basic question: Is it in order to reconsider the vote on a motion that has already been rescinded? I had been assuming that the answer is no.

And such an assumption is correct, it is obviously not in order to reconsider the vote on a motion that has been rescinded. Yes, provided that it is not dilatory.

However, it is in order to reconsider the vote on a motion that has not been rescinded, but if a member is precluded from moving to reconsider simply because a motion to rescind has been made and is pending, then if the motion to rescind is eventually rejected it may well be too late to move to reconsider the vote on the main motion.

Edited by Daniel H. Honemann
See post #39
Link to post
Share on other sites

And such an assumption is correct, it is obviously not in order to reconsider the vote on a motion that has been rescinded.

However, it is in order to reconsider the vote on a motion that has not been rescinded, but if a member is precluded from moving to reconsider simply because a motion to rescind has been made and is pending, then if the motion to rescind is eventually rejected it may well be too late to move to reconsider the vote on the main motion.

But if we admit the motion to Reconsider while Rescind is pending, Rescind is postponed to the next meeting, and then the motion is reconsidered and defeated, what happens to the motion to Rescind? Should it just be deemed moot when it comes up at the next meeting and discarded?

Link to post
Share on other sites

But if we admit the motion to Reconsider while Rescind is pending, Rescind is postponed to the next meeting, and then the motion is reconsidered and defeated, what happens to the motion to Rescind? Should it just be deemed moot when it comes up at the next meeting and discarded?

That was not specifically what I was looking at in the original scenario, but I was seeing that application.

A function of making a motion to Reconsider an adopted main motion would be to prevent a motion Rescind from being introduced, until Reconsider was called up. Presumably, that would be a function of Reconsider an Enter as well.

No, since some of you are no doubt thinking about this, no, I don't have a solid idea of how this works.

Link to post
Share on other sites

And such an assumption is correct, it is obviously not in order to reconsider the vote on a motion that has been rescinded.

However, it is in order to reconsider the vote on a motion that has not been rescinded, but if a member is precluded from moving to reconsider simply because a motion to rescind has been made and is pending, then if the motion to rescind is eventually rejected it may well be too late to move to reconsider the vote on the main motion.

That's true, but the same is true in the situation described on pages 321-322. While the motion to spend the money on athletic equipment is pending, a motion to Reconsider the earlier vote that rejected spending the same money on library books cannot be made -- even though by the time the motion for the athletic equipment has been voted on, even if it is rejected it might still be too late to make the motion to Reconsider.

The broader principle that could apply to both situations is that if there is a pending motion [in J.J.'s case, the motion to Rescind] whose adoption would prevent the adoption of a motion to Reconsider (because the motion to be reconsidered [i.e., the original main motion] could no longer be adopted), then such a motion to Reconsider cannot even be made. Does RONR actually say so? Admittedly, it does not.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's true, but the same is true in the situation described on pages 321-322. While the motion to spend the money on athletic equipment is pending, a motion to Reconsider the earlier vote that rejected spending the same money on library books cannot be made -- even though by the time the motion for the athletic equipment has been voted on, even if it is rejected it might still be too late to make the motion to Reconsider.

Doesn't what is said on pages 321-22 apply to cases where the motion to spend money on athletic equipment has been adopted?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Doesn't what is said on pages 321-22 apply to cases where the motion to spend money on athletic equipment has been adopted?

Yes, but I meant that if you start off with the same situation described there, but analyze what the rule would be while the motion to spend the money on the athletic equipment is still pending, clearly the motion to Reconsider would not be in order, because of part (iii) of paragraph ( b ) in SDC 2.

Edited by Shmuel Gerber
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, but I meant that if you start off with the same situation described there, but analyze what the rule would be while the motion to spend the money on the athletic equipment is still pending, clearly the motion to Reconsider would not be in order, because of part (iii) of paragraph ( b ) in SDC 2.

Okay, I agree.

Now all we have to do is is get around the fact that ( b ) on page 318 precludes only motions to reconsider negative votes in the situations described.

I know you realize this, and I gather that you are merely suggesting that the same principle may be applicable here. You may be entirely correct. I'm just not yet convinced. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

They would be another possibility.

The answer may be:

1. Yes.

2. No.

Yes the motion to reconsider is in order, but, no, rescind is not out of order. If the motion to rescind is adopted, there is nothing left to reconsider; if the motion to rescind is defeated, the member may call up reconsider. Is that possible?

Link to post
Share on other sites

They would be another possibility.

The answer may be:

1. Yes.

2. No.

Yes the motion to reconsider is in order, but, no, rescind is not out of order. If the motion to rescind is adopted, there is nothing left to reconsider; if the motion to rescind is defeated, the member may call up reconsider. Is that possible?

Yes, this seems to be the conclusion reached by Alan H way back in post #4.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...