Renew If No Business Intervenes

[Guest Bdw2003]

Regarding a motion that is not renewable, that cannot be made again, unless progress has been made in business justifying making the motion again...

What if the assembly voted down the non-renewable motion in the first place, but then realized it should have went ahead and voted for it, because of gridlock or deciding they really didn't have any more progress to make.

While RONR provides a motion cannot be renewed until progress has been made in business, is there a procedure which the assembly could follow in the instance above?

Could the assembly vote by unanimous, general consent, to make again the non-renewable motion?

I just have a hard time thinking there is nothing that can be done in such a case, because if that were so, I would think that to be a hindrance to conducting business, because many times things do not always go as planned.

Thanks in advance for your input.

[Dan Honemann]

I don't know what sort of motion you are referring to. It may be one that can be reconsidered. Take a look at Section 37.

[Guest Puzzling]

This is only my opinion. More reasoned replies will follow and wait for them.

A non-renewable motion can always be renewed by a 2/3 vote to "suspend the rules to renew that motion" (this can also be done by unanimous consent) 

In principle there should be two votes:

1) a 2/3 vote to suspend the rules

And if that passes

2) a vote on the non-renewable vote.

Depending on how much time and  debate has elapsed between the original and new motion, it can be argued that the assembly has made progress,( in the sense that it now realises that it is better to adopt the motion,) but these criteria are  a bit tricky , and the chair (or members via "point of order" or "appeal" ) can object to it.

[Josh Martin]

38 minutes ago, Guest Bdw2003 said:

Regarding a motion that is not renewable, that cannot be made again, unless progress has been made in business justifying making the motion again...

What if the assembly voted down the non-renewable motion in the first place, but then realized it should have went ahead and voted for it, because of gridlock or deciding they really didn't have any more progress to make.

While RONR provides a motion cannot be renewed until progress has been made in business, is there a procedure which the assembly could follow in the instance above?

It might be helpful if you could provide a specific motion for your question. The rules are not identical for all motions which may be renewed after progress in debate.

If the defeated motion could be reconsidered (which may or may not be the case), then the motion to Reconsider could be used for this purpose.

38 minutes ago, Guest Bdw2003 said:

Could the assembly vote by unanimous, general consent, to make again the non-renewable motion?

I see no reason why not. The rule in question is, in my view, a suspendable rule, and unanimous consent would certainly be sufficient to suspend the rule.

This may be unnecessary, however, as it may be in order to reconsider the motion.

18 minutes ago, Guest Puzzling said:

A non-renewable motion can always be renewed by a 2/3 vote to "suspend the rules to renew that motion" (this can also be done by unanimous consent) 

In principle there should be two votes:

1) a 2/3 vote to suspend the rules

And if that passes

2) a vote on the non-renewable vote.

These two motions could be combined into one.

"When the purpose of a motion to Suspend the Rules is to permit the making of another motion, and the adoption of the first motion would obviously be followed by the second, the two motions can be combined, as in "to suspend the rules and take from the table the question relating to..." The foregoing is an exception to the general rule that no member can make two motions at the same time except with the consent of the assembly - unanimous consent being required if the two motions are unrelated." RONR (12th ed.) 25:4

Edited April 14, 2021 at 12:15 PM by Josh Martin

[Guest Puzzling]

1 hour ago, Josh Martin said:

It might be helpful if you could provide a specific motion for your question. The rules are not identical for all motions which may be renewed after progress in debate.

If the defeated motion could be reconsidered (which may or may not be the case), then the motion to Reconsider could be used for this purpose.

I see no reason why not. The rule in question is, in my view, a suspendable rule, and unanimous consent would certainly be sufficient to suspend the rule.

This may be unnecessary, however, as it may be in order to reconsider the motion.

These two motions could be combined into one.

"When the purpose of a motion to Suspend the Rules is to permit the making of another motion, and the adoption of the first motion would obviously be followed by the second, the two motions can be combined, as in "to suspend the rules and take from the table the question relating to..." The foregoing is an exception to the general rule that no member can make two motions at the same time except with the consent of the assembly - unanimous consent being required if the two motions are unrelated." RONR (12th ed.) 25:4

Not sure about this. Maybe some members want to debate the renewed motion, combining the "suspend the rules"  and the "renewed motion" would prevent that. It is not clear enough to say that the motions are obviously related.

By the way I do think the original poster BDW 2003 means to reconsider the motion in RONR parlor. (But I don't see any difference between reconsidering and renewing a motion in non-RONR speak)

[Richard Brown]

3 hours ago, Guest Puzzling said:

Not sure about this. Maybe some members want to debate the renewed motion, combining the "suspend the rules"  and the "renewed motion" would prevent that. It is not clear enough to say that the motions are obviously related.

Mr. Martin has it right.  A "combined" motion to Suspend the Rules and to do whatever it is the mover wants to propose is in order even if it makes the second part of the motion non-debatable. So, a motion to "suspend the rules and take from the table the motion to _____ " would be in order and would not be debatable.  The motion to suspend the rules can be combined with a large variety (perhaps an infinite number) of other motions.  Other examples would be to suspend the rules and reconsider the motion to ____", or to "suspend the rules and renew the motion to _____".  

Such a combined motion is used frequently in conventions in order to consider an item of business which is not in order at that point in the agenda or order of business.  I've seen it happen many times at political conventions when certain certain types of resolutions or platform amendments are placed on the agenda near the end of the convention.  It is rather common for a member with a pet resolution or platform item to move earlier in the convention "to suspend the rules and consider (or take up) the resolution on abortion" or to"suspend the rules and adopt the resolution on abortion".  The difference is that with the first example, the resolution on abortion would be debatable and with the second version it would not be debatable.    The first version would be a two-step process (assuming the rules are suspended) and the second version is non-debatable and done in one step, i.e., one vote to suspend the rules and actually adopt the resolution.   It is a way of "beating the clock" and getting a matter considered before the convention has to adjourn sine die.