Lists/Queues with Motions and Amendments

[LClark13]

Scenario...

Once a motion is put on the floor and seconded, and we move into discussion - hands are raised (virtually, for time being) and a list/queue is established for order of discussion on the Motion.  Then a Motion to Amend is put on the floor, seconded, and moved to discussion of the amendment.

 

So...

Does that start with an entirely new list/queue of people to speak on the Amendment??

And then, for the entire list/queue of the prior main Motion - is that list “frozen” and recorded in order in case the amendment fails, and we return to discussion on that main Motion?  

[Gary Novosielski]

This is not the method used in RONR, so it's not possible to answer the question as posed. When someone is finished speaking the chair recognizes one of the members seeking recognition at that time.   (In some cases two lines are formed at two microphones, one for those in support and one for those opposed to the motion, so that pro and con views will alternate.)  Alternating sides is is something RONR favors in general, so if the chair knows who is for or against the motion, they should be recognized alternately if possible.

In general, speeches are limited to two per member and the second one only after no one who has yet to make their first speech is is seeking recognition.  The count would be reset for an amendment, as you have described, and the previous count restored when returning to discussion of the main motion.

But these things are primarily accomplished on the fly, not by setting up a queue at the start.  That would require a bylaws provision or special rule of order adopted by your membership.  I can see some advantages for doing it that way, but there are also drawbacks.  It may be that one of the early speakers raises an important point that others wish to follow up on, but now with the queue preset, they will never get the opportunity.  If someone wishes to propose an amendment, they may never get the chance.  Some who have a place in line will find that by the time their turn comes up the remarks they had planned to make are no longer relevant.  It's not an easy subject to work out.  Especially virtually.

Speaking of which, unless your bylaws allow for "virtual" or electronic meetings, where people are not gathered in the same physical location, then such meetings are prohibited.

 

[Richard Brown]

On 5/21/2021 at 4:36 PM, LClark13 said:

Scenario...

Once a motion is put on the floor and seconded, and we move into discussion - hands are raised (virtually, for time being) and a list/queue is established for order of discussion on the Motion.  Then a Motion to Amend is put on the floor, seconded, and moved to discussion of the amendment.

 

So...

Does that start with an entirely new list/queue of people to speak on the Amendment??

And then, for the entire list/queue of the prior main Motion - is that list “frozen” and recorded in order in case the amendment fails, and we return to discussion on that main Motion?  

I interpret the question as asking what happens to the original queue of members in line to speak on the original motion when an amendment becomes the pending item of business.  Until the fate of the amendment is decided, all debate should be on the proposed amendment.  Once it is resolved by adoption or rejection (or further amendment), debate resumes on the original motion (which might now be the main motion as amended). 

In a normal "in person" meeting, there will not be an actual "speakers' queue", but members will seek recognition as the previous speaker finishes.  In conventions with floor mics, there might be what amounts to a queue.  I do not believe RONR has any direction as to what should happen to such a queue when debate shifts from the original motion to an amendment and then back to the main motion, perhaps as amended.  I have seen it done both ways:  Those members in line to speak on the original main motion sometimes are permitted to hold their place and I've seen it where a new line must form. 

The situation with a Zoom or other online meeting would likely be similar and is something your organization must decide for itself, either by custom or by means of a special rule of order.  RONR has no rules on how to handle debate in an online meeting.

Stay tuned for some other ideas on how to handle it.

 

[Alicia Percell, PRP]

RONR doesn't give direction on this because, as Richard noted above, there really shouldn't be an established speaker's queue under the standard practice in Robert's, though it acknowledges that very large assemblies may need to do it.  See 12th ed., 3:32, which is in context of rising to obtain recognition to speak:

"If two or more rise at about the same time, the general rule is that, all other things being equal, the member who rose and addressed the chair first after the floor was yielded is entitled to be recognized.  A member cannot establish "prior claim" to the floor by rising before it has been yielded.  In principle, it is out of order to rise or be standing while another person has the floor -- except for the purpose of making one of the motions or taking one of the parliamentary steps that can legitimately interrupt at such a time (pages t44-t45).  In a very large assembly, if members must walk some distance to microphones, it may be necessary to vary from the preceding rule as dictated by conditions in the particular hall."

I've generally not objected to speaker's queues which are operated in a reasonable manner, even though it's technically incorrect, but I have objected and quoted the passage above when a chair abused it for the purpose of furthering his own preferences.

With electronic meetings, the hand-raising feature keeps everyone's hands up even after another speaker is recognized.  To do recognition in the way that RONR prescribes, with everyone getting a fresh chance to be first after another speaker finishes, an admin would have to lower everyone's hands as soon as a speaker is recognized, and everyone would again race to raise their hand first when that person finished speaking.  I don't think I've ever seen an electronic meeting admin go to the effort to actually do it this way.  Usually they just leave the hands up and trust the chair will be fair.  If you're in a situation in which there is plenty of time for everyone to speak, there's generally no particular harm to membership rights, but if there are limits on the time allowed for debate this practice can be ripe for abuse by a chair.

[Atul Kapur]

On 5/21/2021 at 5:36 PM, LClark13 said:

So...

Does that start with an entirely new list/queue of people to speak on the Amendment??

And then, for the entire list/queue of the prior main Motion - is that list “frozen” and recorded in order in case the amendment fails, and we return to discussion on that main Motion?  

Disclaimer: this is not in RONR (as you have been told above)

Many organizations handle the list/queue of speakers as you describe, with one slight change:

You have a queue for the main motion.
When an amendment is stated by the chair, there is a new queue for the amendment.  
Once the amendment is disposed of (whether it is adopted or defeated) then you go back to the queue for the main motion (± the amendment).

 

[LClark13]

Thank you!!