Importance of putting the motion properly

[Joshua Katz]

I just watched a chairman put a rather important question to a vote without stating just what motion was pending. The result was some tense moments. After the motion carried, at least one member stated she didn't understand exactly what had been adopted (although she voted against anyway). There ensued much discussion about exactly what decision had been made. As I said, it was a pretty important decision.

[Guest Zev]

Not stating the motion for the vote is an egregious dereliction of duty by the presiding officer and should be censured, and violates the section "The Stating of the Question by the Chair" on pages 37-42. My impression is that the presiding officer is trying to force something down the assembly's throat with this slight of hand. However, if he does this all the time then perhaps its only ignorance of proper procedure, but still disturbing.

[Joshua Katz]

10 minutes ago, Guest Zev said:

My impression is that the presiding officer is trying to force something down the assembly's throat with this slight of hand.

Oh, for sure. I suspect he was worried about the time; there was a rule of a superior body (usually suspended but not in this case) requiring adjournment just a few minutes later, and the chair clearly wanted the motion to pass, both before time expired and before any amendments could be made, much of the debate having been about potential amendments, although none were moved. It was a parliamentary mess, to be sure, whatever ones opinions on the underlying merits.

[Dan Honemann]

I don't think there was any real question about what was being voted on by the committee. The vote was simply preceded by one member stating that, although he would vote yes on the question being voted on, he wanted to make it clear that he would not vote yes in the full assembly unless certain conditions were met prior to the question coming to a vote.

 

[Joshua Katz]

I heard two people ask what the vote was, after which they said they didn't agree about what it was, and one say afterwards she hadn't been sure what they were voting on. If the chair had clarified "the question is on recommending confirmation by the full assembly, with no timeline restrictions" there wouldn't have been that confusion (although, of course, some still would not have liked the outcome).

[Dan Honemann]

2 minutes ago, Joshua Katz said:

I heard two people ask what the vote was, after which they said they didn't agree about what it was, and one say afterwards she hadn't been sure what they were voting on. If the chair had clarified "the question is on recommending confirmation by the full assembly, with no timeline restrictions" there wouldn't have been that confusion (although, of course, some still would not have liked the outcome).

The member who was allowed to express his reservations just prior to the vote had made it plain that he was not offering an amendment.

[Richard Brown]

Although there was perhaps a bit of confusion do to a rapidly changing situation, my understanding of what happened is the same as that of Mr . Honemann. It was clear to me that no amendment was being offered.

[Guest Who's Coming to Dinner]

44 minutes ago, Joshua Katz said:

Oh, for sure. I suspect he was worried about the time; there was a rule of a superior body (usually suspended but not in this case) requiring adjournment just a few minutes later, and the chair clearly wanted the motion to pass, both before time expired and before any amendments could be made, much of the debate having been about potential amendments, although none were moved. It was a parliamentary mess, to be sure, whatever ones opinions on the underlying merits.

So perhaps your post should be retitled, "The Importance of Putting the Question IMProperly."

[Joshua Katz]

25 minutes ago, Guest Who's Coming to Dinner said:

So perhaps your post should be retitled, "The Importance of Putting the Question IMProperly."

It seems others think it wasn't confusing. I got the same result the last time I tried to use the news to illustrate a point - the UCLA case where the student government produced a transcript in place of minutes. It was also underwhelming. Perhaps next time.

[Chris Harrison]

It seemed to me that part of the problem was 4 or 5 people were all talking over each other between when the reservations were stated and when the Chairman was putting the question.  Folks were questioning how exactly these reservations would impact the question at hand and the Chairman wasn't clear with any implications before the vote was taken.

[Joshua Katz]

7 minutes ago, Chris Harrison said:

It seemed to me that part of the problem was 4 or 5 people were all talking over each other between when the reservations were stated and when the Chairman was putting the question.  Folks were questioning how exactly these reservations would impact the question at hand and the Chairman wasn't clear with any implications before the vote was taken.

That's my read as well, particularly the part about the chair being unclear. 

[Richard Brown]

I'm confident every member of the committee knew what the committee was voting on. It was a simple motion to report the nomination favorably. No more, no less. They knew all day long that that is the motion they would be voting on.

[Guest Who's Coming to Dinner]

But as we know, many unplanned motions may be made during the course of a meeting. Is the chairman absolved of responsibility to clear up confusion when it arises, simply because the members "knew all day long" what they would be voting on? I don't believe so, particularly when the confusion stems from the chair's failure to maintain order.

[Dan Honemann]

All of the confused members (I'll admit that that is a good way to described them) were the ones causing whatever disorder existed, and they all voted no, which is exactly what they said they would do. They accomplished what they wanted to accomplish. Time to move on.

And in any event, this has nothing to do with Robert's Rules of Order.……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..……………………………………….