Special Rule of Order and Limit or Extend Limits of Debate

[JustinPappano]

Hi all,

Am I correct in my interpretation of 25:3 that if an assembly has a Special Rule of Order stating, "All members shall have two opportunities to speak on each question for no more than 9 minutes per speech per day" and that if that assembly adopts a motion to Limit or Extend Limits of debate to a time that is contrary to their Special Rule of Order, that motion is effectively the motion to Suspend the Rules and in order?

Am I also correct that it does not require a higher threshold than a 2/3 vote as per #92 in the tinted pages?

Thank you all in advance. 

[Josh Martin]

58 minutes ago, JustinPappano said:

Am I correct in my interpretation of 25:3 that if an assembly has a Special Rule of Order stating, "All members shall have two opportunities to speak on each question for no more than 9 minutes per speech per day" and that if that assembly adopts a motion to Limit or Extend Limits of debate to a time that is contrary to their Special Rule of Order, that motion is effectively the motion to Suspend the Rules and in order?

It seems to me that it is still a motion to Limit or Extend Limits of Debate and it is in order. The purpose of the motion to Limit or Extend Limits of Debate is used to change the limits on debate. Whether those limits on debate are contained in RONR or in the assembly's own rules is immaterial. Nothing in the rule in question suggests to me that it is intended to prevent the making of a motion to Limit or Extend Limits of Debate, just that the default limit is nine minutes instead of ten.

58 minutes ago, JustinPappano said:

Am I also correct that it does not require a higher threshold than a 2/3 vote as per #92 in the tinted pages?

As I have previously noted, I don't believe the rule in question needs to be suspended in order to adopt a motion to Limit or Extend Limits of Debate. In any event, I see no reason why more than a 2/3 vote would be required to suspend the rule. Nothing in the text of the rule suggests to me that the rule is intended to protect a minority of one-third or less. Indeed, nothing in the rule suggests to me that it is intended to protect the minority at all. The rule simply seems to provide that speeches shall be no more than nine minutes (instead of ten).

An assembly certainly could adopt a special rule of order which limits the assembly's ability to adopt a motion to Limit or Extend Limits of Debate, or even one which limits the assembly's ability to suspend the rule, but I see nothing in the text of this particular rule indicating that either of these things is the case.

Edited February 20, 2021 at 07:04 PM by Josh Martin

[Rob Elsman]

The motion you are describing has the characteristics of either motion 32 or motion 33 in Table II of the "tinted pages", notwithstanding the special rule of order that has previously been adopted.  It has nothing to do with motion 92.  If it is an instance of motion 32, its rank in the order of precedence is described in 15:5; if it is an instance of motion 33, its rank in the order of precedence is described in 10:8.