Postpone Indefinitely in a committee

[J. J.]

In a standing committee, may postpone indefinitely be made in regard:

A.  To a main motion that was referred to the committee?

B.  To a main motion being proposed by a member of the committee, during a meeting of the committee?

[Guest Michael Seebeck]

A. No. That question goes directly to the establishment of the committee in the first place, and while they can recommend to the establishing body to postpone indefinitely, it's not in their scope to not consider it.

B. Yes.

[Caryn Ann Harlos]

We have a Committee meeting tonight, it would be a case of scenario B, and I would love if some of the parliamentarians in here can give their view.  I will likely be asked to rule on such a motion and I am hoping to get some clarity.

[Dan Honemann]

 

On 10/5/2023 at 7:10 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos said:

We have a Committee meeting tonight, it would be a case of scenario B, and I would love if some of the parliamentarians in here can give their view.  I will likely be asked to rule on such a motion and I am hoping to get some clarity.

Why is it that you think that the motion to Postpone Indefinitely may not be in order?

[Caryn Ann Harlos]

On 10/5/2023 at 6:02 AM, Dan Honemann said:

 

Why is it that you think that the motion to Postpone Indefinitely may not be in order?

Because the question cannot be called on a committee in order to get the unfettered mature judgment of the Committee.  This seems to be a way to shut down a full discussion that would violate that spirit at least.

[Dan Honemann]

On 10/5/2023 at 8:10 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos said:

Because the question cannot be called on a committee in order to get the unfettered mature judgment of the Committee.  This seems to be a way to shut down a full discussion that would violate that spirit at least.

But what sort of main motion is it that you have in mind?

[Caryn Ann Harlos]

On 10/5/2023 at 6:17 AM, Dan Honemann said:

But what sort of main motion is it that you have in mind?

Okay let me be more specific.  This is a bylaws committee so they are making motions to approve proposals that will then be presented to assembly.

So the motion would be for the committee to recommend the following changes: blah blah blah.

There are a few recommendations that it is possible a majority of the committee think have no chance of passing the assembly (and potentially no chance of passing the committee) and do not wish to spend committee time on them and wanted to move to postpone indefinitely.

[Dan Honemann]

On 10/5/2023 at 8:40 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos said:

Okay let me be more specific.  This is a bylaws committee so they are making motions to approve proposals that will then be presented to assembly.

So the motion would be for the committee to recommend the following changes: blah blah blah.

There are a few recommendations that it is possible a majority of the committee think have no chance of passing the assembly (and potentially no chance of passing the committee) and do not wish to spend committee time on them and wanted to move to postpone indefinitely.

Well, the motion to Postpone Indefinitely is fully debatable, and debate on it can go fully into the merits of the main motion, so I don't see how the making of such a motion will prevent full and unfettered consideration of the main motion. 

[Rob Elsman]

The answers to the questions posed by @J. J. require more information than we have been given.

With respect to question "A", the proper answer depends on whether the committee has been given the power not to report.  For example, it is often the case that the Resolutions Committee of a convention will be given the power to permanently dispose of resolutions that have been referred to it.  However, in most local units of ordinary societies, standing and special committees do not have the power to dispose of main motions that have been referred--there is no such thing as "pigeonholing" these kinds of motions, and the parent body has the ability to discharge the committee if it fails to report after a reasonable time.  So, I think there is no single answer that universally applies.

With respect to question "B", I cannot see what particular parliamentary purpose the subsidiary motion, Postpone Indefinitely, would serve in an ordinary standing committee.  Unlike an assembly, an ordinary committee does not "go on record" on behalf of the society, so there really is no reason for the committee to simply reject the main motion initiated by the member of the committee.  Perhaps more information would be helpful, but, as of now, I am of the opinion that nothing is to be gained by moving Postpone Indefinitely in an ordinary standing committee.

[Caryn Ann Harlos]

I think I said above why desirable.  A motion the committee does not wish to allow a minority to go on at length about with amendments they feel are useless, eating up committee time, when a majority of them (potentially) do not want to consider.  It is a way to allow debate on the big picture, without getting into the weeds of dozens of amendments.  This committee literally has spent 6-8 hours on one proposal before which is fine when a majority of the committee likes the general idea but wants to refine, but this motion it is thought that possibly a majority of the committee does not want the basic idea no matter how amended or wants to spend time on other proposals rather than the work that would cause this one to be remotely acceptable.

(I don't know if a majority feels that way but several committee members believe so.)

 

That is the value.

[Rob Elsman]

Postpone Indefinitely does not prevent debate and amendment on the pending main motion, so I do not get it.

[Caryn Ann Harlos]

Maybe I'm being dumb, how does it allow amendment on the main motion while PI is pending?

[Weldon Merritt]

On 10/5/2023 at 7:31 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos said:

Maybe I'm being dumb, how does it allow amendment on the main motion while PI is pending?

Because Amend is a higher ranking subsidiary motion than Postpone Indefinitely.

[Rob Elsman]

The order of precedence ranks the subsidiary motion, Amend, higher than the subsidiary motion, Postpone Indefinitely.  Thus, Amend is in order while Postpone Indefinitely is immediately pending.

Also, Postpone Indefinitely fully opens up the merits of the main motion to debate while Postpone Indefinitely is immediately pending.

So, I just do not understand how Postpone Indefinitely accomplishes the parliamentary purposes you have in mind.

[Caryn Ann Harlos]

Still confused, so are you saying that when a motion to postpone indefinitely is pending someone can move to amend the main motion?  Don't you have to dispose of the pending motion to postpone indefinitely first?

[Caryn Ann Harlos]

Okay got it, though that is supremely confusing.  I have never been personally involved in a PI (was at a meeting once when it was used, and I don't think those participants knew that) but good to know.

But this raises a question as to a purpose.... I know all meetings of a special committee constitute one session but what about a standing committee like a bylaws committee?  Is each meeting a separate session?  

[Rob Elsman]

1) Yes; 2) No.

[Rob Elsman]

On 10/5/2023 at 8:40 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos said:

But this raises a question as to a purpose.... I know all meetings of a special committee constitute one session but what about a standing committee like a bylaws committee?  Is each meeting a separate session?  

What difference does it make?

[Caryn Ann Harlos]

On 10/5/2023 at 7:42 AM, Rob Elsman said:

What difference does it make?

Because PI kills for entire session.  No one can bring it up again.

[Caryn Ann Harlos]

To be clear, I'm inclined against PI for other practical reasons- some members just see it as a dirty trick and I'd rather not deal with the politics of it.

[Rob Elsman]

Recall that, in ordinary committees, the motion, Reconsider, can be made by a member who was on the losing side of the vote.  RONR (12th ed.) 37:8.  I am still not understanding what you are getting at.

[Dan Honemann]

On 10/5/2023 at 9:46 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos said:

To be clear, I'm inclined against PI for other practical reasons- some members just see it as a dirty trick and I'd rather not deal with the politics of it.

But you have your answer.  The motion is in order.

[Rob Elsman]

I do not understand what dirty trick there is.  When used for a legitimate parliamentary purpose, Postpone Indefinitely is a recognized and useful subsidiary motion.  Perhaps your group needs further training.

[Caryn Ann Harlos]

On 10/5/2023 at 7:47 AM, Rob Elsman said:

Recall that, in ordinary committees, the motion, Reconsider, can be made by a member who was on the losing side of the vote.  RONR (12th ed.) 37:8.  I am still not understanding what you are getting at.

That's not correct.  37:35(3)

cannot have voted with losing side

[Caryn Ann Harlos]

On 10/5/2023 at 7:50 AM, Rob Elsman said:

I do not understand what dirty trick there is.  When used for a legitimate parliamentary purpose, Postpone Indefinitely is a recognized and useful subsidiary motion.  Perhaps your group needs further training.

I cannot even begin to explain .... Josh and JJ understand.  We are .... different.