Can same person second both motion and amendment?

[Guest Jerry Siders]

Last Saturday during our parliamentary training, several of us discussed about same person's seconding both motion and amendment. Some said yes and some said no. I checked over the RRO and found nothing. Can someone help us?

Jerry Siders

[jstackpo]

I say "Yes".

[Tim Wynn]

Last Saturday during our parliamentary training, several of us discussed about same person's seconding both motion and amendment. Some said yes and some said no. I checked over the RRO and found nothing. Can someone help us?

Jerry Siders

One member makes a motion and another member seconds it. It doesn't matter how many motions a member has made or seconded in the past. Perhaps, it would help to realize that an amendment is simply another motion, which requires one member to make it and another to second it.

[Kim Goldsworthy]

... several of us discussed about same person's seconding both motion and amendment.

Some said yes and some said no.

I checked over the RRO and found nothing.

That's right.

You won't find anything in RONR which restricts seconders to only a limited pool of the membership.

(i.e., no rule in RONR implies, "X cannot second the Motion M," or "It is out of order for X to second a motion.")

Seconds (well, seconders) have NO restrictions.

Members can second motions.

Even the mover of the original main motion can second all the amendments to his main motion.

[Shmuel Gerber]

That's right.

You won't find anything in RONR which restricts seconders to only a limited pool of the membership.

(i.e., no rule in RONR implies, "X cannot second the Motion M," or "It is out of order for X to second a motion.")

Seconds (well, seconders) have NO restrictions.

Members can second motions.

This is obviously not true, since the seconder of a motion must be someone other than the maker of that same motion.

[Gary Novosielski]

Last Saturday during our parliamentary training, several of us discussed about same person's seconding both motion and amendment. Some said yes and some said no. I checked over the RRO and found nothing. Can someone help us?

Jerry Siders

Since you found nothing (because there is nothing), you can be sure there is no such rule (because there is no such rule).