Caryn Ann Harlos Posted June 25, 2018 at 06:37 AM Report Share Posted June 25, 2018 at 06:37 AM I am Chair of the National Libertarian Party Platform Committee. We had a platform plank 2.4 which was amended by splitting into two - so that we have 2.4 and 2.5, and then the language in 2.4 was changed. There is a minority report advocating a change to the new 2.5. A member objected that this minority report is not germane since the committee report did not amend any of that language. I tend to disagree. If the plank was not split, this addition would have been germane so why isn't it just because it was split in two? And what if we move the changes first and the split second. It is the same result - would one really make this minority report germane and the other not? And alternatively, can't it be argued that 2.5, even though it uses previous language is a new plank, thus the whole thing is new language and thus other language be proposed? Also note that the member did try to move this in the meeting, but was denied an extension of time to do so, partly because he was polite and let the language of 2.4 be perfected first. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hieu H. Huynh Posted June 25, 2018 at 10:16 AM Report Share Posted June 25, 2018 at 10:16 AM The assembly would decide whether the amendment was germane. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Elsman Posted June 25, 2018 at 11:07 AM Report Share Posted June 25, 2018 at 11:07 AM When plank 2.5 is considered at the convention, the amendment to modify it is in order. An amendment to modify plank 2.5 is not in order when plank 2.5 is not being considered. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J. J. Posted June 25, 2018 at 01:59 PM Report Share Posted June 25, 2018 at 01:59 PM A committee could offer amendment of its own (p.176, ll. 20-32). I'm not, initially, seeing a problem. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts