Minority of One Third

[Tim Wynn]

I want to make sure I understand what RONR says on tinted page 27, #80 Suspend the Rules, Vote Required For Adoption: “Two-thirds -- except where rule protects a minority of less than one third.”

Does this mean that a rule that protects a minority of exactly one third can be suspended by a two-thirds vote, in the face of a negative vote as large as the minority protected by the rule?

[Kim Goldsworthy]

... except where rule protects a minority of less than one third.”

... a minority of exactly one third ...

I think there is a difference between

(a.) the rule's "less than"; vs.

(b.) the question's "exactly".

If you have a fraction of greater than one third, then the rule won't apply.

I think we would agree on that.

And, we talking about the same kind of rule being suspended?

That is, a STANDING RULE can be suspended with a majority vote, you know.

So I hope we are focusing on the same class of rule.

[Gary Novosielski]

I want to make sure I understand what RONR says on tinted page 27, #80 Suspend the Rules, Vote Required For Adoption: “Two-thirds -- except where rule protects a minority of less than one third.”

Does this mean that a rule that protects a minority of exactly one third can be suspended by a two-thirds vote, in the face of a negative vote as large as the minority protected by the rule?

I see your point.

A 2/3 vote is sufficient to adopt a motion in the face of a negative vote as large as 1/3.

Therefore it cannot be said to "protect" minorities of 1/3, but only minorities larger than that.

So, are you saying that, since a two-thirds vote protects only minorities of more than one third, Tinted #80 would be more correct to say "Two-thirds--except where rule protects a minority of one third or less."?

I suppose that's true.

Fortunately, I don't believe there are any rules in RONR that protect a minority of exactly one third.

[Tim Wynn]

I see your point.

A 2/3 vote is sufficient to adopt a motion in the face of a negative vote as large as 1/3.

Therefore it cannot be said to "protect" minorities of 1/3, but only minorities larger than that.

So, are you saying that, since a two-thirds vote protects only minorities of more than one third, Tinted #80 would be more correct to say "Two-thirds--except where rule protects a minority of one third or less."?

I suppose that's true.

That's what I was wondering about, yes.

[Josh Martin]

I want to make sure I understand what RONR says on tinted page 27, #80 Suspend the Rules, Vote Required For Adoption: “Two-thirds -- except where rule protects a minority of less than one third.”

Does this mean that a rule that protects a minority of exactly one third can be suspended by a two-thirds vote, in the face of a negative vote as large as the minority protected by the rule?

Whenever there is a conflict between the body of the text and the tinted pages, I would go with the body of the text. If there was, for instance, a special rule which allowed some procedural motion to be adopted by a 1/3 vote (such as a demand for a roll call vote), such a motion could not be suspended in the face of a 1/3 vote in the negative, based upon the rule of RONR, 10th ed., pg. 253, lines 8-10. As Mr. Novosielski suggests, the language on tinted page 27 should read "a minority of one third or less" in order to be consistent with this rule.