Chapter 7
Debate: Discussing the Pros and Cons of Ideas
In This Chapter
Getting recognized by the chair
Assigning the floor to the right person
Focusing discussion on the merits of the question
Interrupting a member who has the floor
Knowing which motions are debatable
When it comes to meetings, the fun doesn’t really start until you’re standing in front of everybody and, except for Mr. Boor rudely whispering to Miss Priss, they’re all tuned in to hear what you’ve got to say. Some members are eagerly waiting to cheer you on; others are probably thinking about how to get everyone to listen to them instead. Either way, it’s your turn to talk, and you need to make the most of it.
Whether you’re the presiding officer or simply a member at the meeting, you won’t last long without a working knowledge of the rules of debate. If you’re the presiding officer, you need to know how to decide who gets to speak so that the meeting runs fairly. If you’re part of the assembly, you need to know how to claim an opportunity to speak when you want to make a point.
This chapter guides you through the nuances of debating. For the presiding officer, it’s about managing the floor. For the member, it’s about listening and being heard. And for both, it’s about being nice and professional when you’re in the thick of it.
Understanding the Debate Process
Debate is Robert’s Rules lingo for the time you spend discussing, amending, or otherwise dealing with a motion to arrive at its final disposition. Members take turns having their say, and in many cases, debate involves nothing more than spending a little time on a couple of amendments. However, it can also be a time when a lot of people have a lot to say about whether the group should agree on a motion and take the action it proposes.
When it comes to debating a motion in a meeting, you really have no such thing as pure and unencumbered freedom of speech. Because you’re a deliberative assembly, you’re concerned not only with the rights of individual members to have their say, but also with the rights of the group. Debate is thus subject to rules and limitations on who’s allowed to speak on an issue, and how often and how long speakers can hold the floor. Protecting the rights of both the members and the group is also why rules for debate can be limited or extended, but only by a two-thirds vote.
Rules for debate are designed to balance members’ rights to speak with the assembly’s right to make its decision and move on to something else.
To Debate or Not to Debate, That Is the Question!
A quick look at the tables of subsidiary and privileged motions in Chapters 9 and 10 shows you that all the motions that rank above Postpone to a Certain Time (or Definitely) are undebatable. If you think about it, it makes perfect sense because everything of any higher rank is pretty much a yes-or-no question. Motions to Limit Debate, Lay (a motion) on the Table, or Adjourn just don’t leave much room for question. Except for tweaks to the amendable motions, you don’t really have anything to discuss.
The same is true for most incidental motions. As you can see in Chapter 11, incidental motions deal with questions of procedure. Except for appeals and resignations, procedure is procedure — what is there to discuss?
When it comes to procedural motions, in most cases, you’re either for the motion or against it, depending on the immediate parliamentary situation. So by defining a motion as undebatable, Robert’s Rules is really just saying, “Take the vote and move on!”
Table 7-1 lays out the debatable motions and provides you with some key information about each one. You may find it ironic that meetings are all about discussing ideas and taking action, yet the list of debatable motions is really quite short. Of course, the advantage of a short list is that you don’t have to remember much to know what’s debatable and what’s not. (Browse Chapters 6, 9, 11, and 12 for more information on these motions.)
Table 7-1 Debatable Motions
|
Motion |
Key Points |
|
Main motions |
Debate is limited only by rules for length and number of speeches and, of course, rules of decorum. |
|
Postpone Indefinitely |
Discussion can encompass the merits of the main motion. |
|
Amend |
Debate is limited to merits of the proposed amendment. (Motion to Amend is undebatable if the underlying motion is undebatable.) |
|
Commit |
Discussion is limited to merits and details of referring. |
|
Postpone to a Certain Time (or Definitely) |
Discussion is limited to merits and details of postponing. |
|
Appeal |
Discussion is limited to the subject matter of the appeal. (But if debate serves no purpose and gets in the way of business, as is sometimes the case when the underlying motion is undebatable, then the motion to Appeal isn’t debatable.) |
|
Request to Be Excused from a Duty |
Discussion isn’t limited because each situation in which this motion is used is unique, and it’s vital to have the information necessary to make a proper decision. |
|
Rescind or Amend Something Previously Adopted (and Discharge a Committee) |
Discussion can go fully into the merits of the subject matter. |
|
Reconsider |
Discussion can go fully into the merits of the motion to be reconsidered, unless that motion is undebatable. |
Presiding over the Debate
If you’re a presiding officer, your leadership skills are clearly on display when you’re chairing a meeting during the consideration of a motion on which a lot of people have a lot to say.
When it comes to presiding, your number-one duty is to know the rules. The rules for discussion and debate get quite a workout in meetings, so if you know the rules, you’ll do just fine. And if you don’t know them, sooner or later, you’ll wish you did.
Starting the debate
In meetings, discussion (also known as debate) is in order only when a motion is on the floor. A motion is on the floor after the presiding officer (also known as the chair) states the motion (see Chapter 6). For example, the chair may say something like, “It is moved and seconded to buy a fire truck for County Volunteer Company No. 2.”
The discussion of ideas is the key component of any meeting. Once the motion is on the floor, it’s up to the members and you, as the presiding officer, to work as a team to figure out what, if anything, the assembly wants to do with the motion.
Your job while presiding is to keep up with who has spoken and who wants to speak. You control the assignment of the floor and handle discussion and secondary motions either until no further discussion is forthcoming or until members close debate or otherwise dispose of the motion.
The way you move things along is a matter of style. You call for debate by asking, “Is there any debate?” or “Is there any discussion?” or “Are you ready for the question?” Or you can even say something like, “Ms. Gliggenschlapp, do you wish to speak to your motion?
You also need to know rules relating to discussion and debate, along with how to apply them, especially with regard to these actions:
Assigning the floor
Maintaining the appearance of impartiality
Handling an appeal
Taking the vote
Assigning the floor
Knowing that members control decisions but the chair controls the floor is at the heart of successful presiding.
Early in a discussion, the situation is pretty clear. Members rise and address the chair, and you basically want to take them in the order they seek recognition — first come, first served.
But deciding who gets the floor isn’t always that easy. When the masses clamor for your attention, how do you decide whom to recognize? The needs and rights of the assembly are a big consideration in this decision. Knowing who’s up first isn’t enough; you often need to know why a member seeks recognition.
For example, you’ve just announced the result of the vote on buying a new outdoor grill for the clubhouse, and Jumping Jack Gnash favors you with his favorite line: “Mr. Chairman! Mr. Chairman!” All his life, Jack has been the long-snouted me-first, and he is usually the same guy who jumps up to move to “reconsider” some vote when he voted on the losing side (flip to the important stuff about the motion to Reconsider in Chapter 12).
But while Jack was jumping, Nola Nicely rose to her feet and called out pleasantly, “Mr. Chairman?” You ask why she seeks recognition of the chair, and she lets you know that she wants to move that you retake the vote on buying that new grill, only this time by ballot. And what Nola wants, Nola gets. Because Nola’s motion, if it is to be adopted, can’t be decided later, like whatever Jack’s great idea was.
If General Robert were here today, he’d be telling you that, by electing you to chair their meeting, the members have given you the job of making sure you put before them all the questions they need to decide. That task is what the job of assigning the floor really is all about.
But entitlement to preference in recognition depends not only on who wants to speak and why, but also on the parliamentary situation. The rules to follow depend on which of these situations applies:
No question is pending.
A debatable question is immediately pending.
An undebatable question is immediately pending.
When no question is pending
You’ve finished with a particular item of business, but you haven’t moved on to the next order of business (see Chapter 5) or stated a new motion.
In a special meeting, a member planning to offer a motion for which the meeting was called has preference in recognition over others who may offer competing motions. (See Chapter 3 for more information on special meetings.)
When getting a motion before the group requires a series of motions, such as needing to lay a motion on the table to take up a more urgent motion, the member who made the intervening motion (in this case, the motion to Lay on the Table) is entitled to recognition so that he can make the motion he’s trying to get on the floor.
If a motion is voted down because a member offers to make a certain motion if the assembly defeats a pending motion, that member is entitled to preference in recognition for the purpose of making the new motion.
Even when a member is entitled to recognition to make a main motion, if another member seeks recognition to do one of the following, that member must be recognized first:
• To make a motion to Reconsider and Enter on the Minutes (see Chapter 12)
• To make a motion to Reconsider a vote (see Chapter 12)
• To call up a motion to Reconsider (see Chapter 12)
• To give previous notice (see Chapter 4)
• To make the motion to Take from the Table (see Chapter 12)
When a debatable motion is immediately pending
This situation applies most of the time during discussion and debate. As the presiding officer, you may often find yourself asking, “For what purpose does the member rise?” If it’s not one of the following, your job is to inform the member, “That’s not in order at this time,” and move on to the next member seeking recognition.
A member rising to give notice is entitled to recognition (see Chapter 4).
The member who made the immediately pending motion is entitled to preference in recognition if he hasn’t already spoken.
A member is entitled to speak a second time only after everybody else who wants to speak has done so.
The chair alternates recognition between proponents and opponents of the pending motion.
If the pending motion is one that was adopted earlier and is now being reconsidered for the purpose of being amended, the member who made the motion to Reconsider (see Chapter 12) — for the specific purpose of amending the motion now being reconsidered — is entitled to preference in recognition to move his amendment.
If the pending debatable question is on whether to sustain a ruling of the chair on an appeal (see “Handling an appeal,” later in this chapter) or a Point of Order (see Chapter 11) that the chair has turned over to the assembly to decide, the chair is entitled to speak once ahead of any other member and then again before closing debate. The chairman gets this nifty privilege when the assembly is to make a decision usually made by the chairman.
When an undebatable question is immediately pending
If a motion is undebatable, well, it’s not in order to say much of anything. Only the following two situations give anybody any reason to claim the floor:
A member rising to give notice (see Chapter 4) is entitled to recognition.
A member rising to make a motion that takes precedence over the pending motion is entitled to recognition. For example, Previous Question (see Chapter 9) isn’t debatable. But if Andy Doorhugger wants to move to Adjourn (see Chapter 10), he’s entitled to the floor.
Deciding who to recognize
As the presiding officer, you decide which members get recognized and assigned the floor. And as with any other decision of the chair, if you’re in doubt about who’s entitled to recognition, you can ask the members and let them vote on who to recognize.
When the assembly is of the huge kind and people are lining up at microphones all over the place, Robert’s Rules allows you to make adaptations to the rules based on the situation, at least until you adopt the special rules you need to manage all the people who want to speak. But when it’s not so big, the decision is usually routine.
If you’re not sure whether an interruption by a member is in order, before recognizing the member, simply say, “For what purpose does the member rise?” Based on the response, you make your decision on whether to recognize the member; if his purpose is in order, you recognize him. If not, you inform him that his purpose is not in order at this time.
In any case, if you err in assigning the floor, your assignment is subject to a point of order. And for the most part, except in mass meetings and large meetings such as conventions, the chair’s ruling is subject to appeal (see Chapter 11).
Refraining from debate
Allowing yourself to be drawn into a debate is one of the surest ways to lose the confidence your members have in your ability to preside impartially. Your job is to facilitate the members making all the points, pro and con, on an issue. If you feel strongly about an issue, you’d better hope your political allies can handle advancing your goals from the floor. You must not give them any edge or advantage.
The appearance of impartiality is the key to presiding over debate. Nobody expects you to be impartial; chances are good that you were elected because you have a program you hope to advance. But when you’re presiding, stick to the job at hand.
If you absolutely must engage in the debate, you’re obligated to yield the chair to a chairman pro tem and step down until the motion is disposed of.
Handling an appeal
The rules for assigning the floor during a debatable appeal (see Chapter 11) are generally the same as in any discussion, except that members may speak only once and you, as the chair, may speak not only once, but twice! You get to speak first — after the appeal has been moved and seconded — to explain your ruling. Then, after everyone else has had a say, you get to speak again to respond to the points made by the members and explain your ruling further before you take the vote on the appeal.
Closing debate and taking the vote
Your duty as a presiding officer is to enable the group to conduct a full and free hearing of both sides of an issue. However, debate isn’t permitted to continue after voting begins. But because of the right of members to enjoy all the time the group is willing to spend in debate, it’s not in order to move so quickly to the voting as to silence a member who legitimately seeks the floor to speak or make a secondary motion.
Robert’s Rules calls this practice of silencing members gaveling through, and it’s looked upon as particularly contemptible. If you ignore a member who seeks recognition before voting starts and proceed to take a vote, the vote must be disregarded and debate reopened, even if the result has been announced. However, when you’ve made sure the members have a full opportunity to claim the floor before you move on to the voting, it’s too late to reopen debate after voting has begun.
The debate remains closed even if the vote isn’t conclusive and if additional votes are necessary to determine the result.
Debating As a Member
Knowing the rules of debate as they apply to a presiding officer and his duties isn’t enough. Whether you’re presiding or participating as a member, it’s to your advantage (if not your duty) to know the rules for members’ participation in debate.
Taking your turn
You’ve been patiently waiting for the chair to recognize you. You’ve listened to everybody else so you won’t waste time repeating points already made. Now you’re ready to have your say.
If members try, as sometimes they do, to shut you out by making demands for adjournment or calls to table, they’re out of order. As long as you’ve been assigned the floor, your presiding officer has a duty to help you have your say. Motions from those other members who have not been recognized and assigned the floor are just hot air.
Seeking recognition and obtaining the floor
Seeking recognition is at first as simple as rising and addressing the chair with the statement “Mr./Madam President!” And unless someone else has preference in recognition, the chair says, “The chair recognizes Ms. Goodsense.”
You may be competing for recognition, and the chair may need to ask why you seek recognition. Be prepared to answer that question, and take care only to seek the floor for a purpose that’s in order at the time. And if you think the chair has improperly recognized another person when you’re entitled to preference in recognition, you can make a point of order, forcing the chair to stop whatever else is happening and listen to your concern.
You have to follow a timeliness requirement to make a Point of Order (see Chapter 11). If you’re entitled to preference in recognition, you must make your point before the other person begins to speak.
Because the chair has the prerogative of assigning the floor, you need to be aware of what entitles you to preference in recognition. (Jump back to the section “Assigning the floor,” earlier in this chapter, for an explanation.)
Limitations on debate
Unless your group has adopted special rules of order (see Chapter 2), you come to every meeting entitled to speak twice on every motion, with a limit of ten minutes per speech. That’s 20 minutes per person, per motion, per meeting. It’s a wonder meetings don’t last for weeks!
Well, not really. Limits exist within the limits, and your group always has access to one of the most useful subsidiary motions: the motion to Limit Debate. I cover that motion in Chapter 9, and it’s a great tool for keeping things short and sweet. In fact, it’s not uncommon for a group to adopt a motion to limit discussion to a set period of time, to a set number of speeches for or against, to a shorter time per speech, or to some combination of these options.
To be sure you have your say, though, you need to be familiar with how the limitations on debate work.
Speaking a second time: Under Robert’s Rules, you can’t speak a second time until everybody else who wants to speak has done so. If Mr. Smartypants has spoken once and the chair lets him speak again while you’re attempting to be recognized, you have every right to claim the floor, even if you have to rise to a point of order (see Chapter 11) to do so.
Requesting an extension of time: The chair is responsible for letting you (or any other member) know when your time is up, and it’s your duty to honor the chair’s polite notice that your time has expired and immediately conclude your remarks. If you need more time, you can ask for it, or if the chair deems it appropriate, she can offer the members the opportunity to consent to an extension.
Yielding time: You can’t transfer time. When you yield the floor, you waive your remaining time, but that remaining time doesn’t get added to another member’s time. Yielding for a question counts against your time.
As with many elements of Robert’s Rules, the limits on debate aren’t completely without exceptions.
Committee reports: Time limits don’t apply when a committee report is being given. But if the reporting member speaks to a motion to enact one of the committee’s recommendations, that discussion is on the clock.
Making secondary motions: Introducing a secondary motion isn’t considered debate on the pending motion unless a member goes into the merits of the pending motion while making the secondary motion.
Debating secondary motions: When secondary motions are debatable, limits on debate apply anew to debate on the merits of the secondary motions, but debate on the secondary motion may not go into the merits of the main motion except for the motion to Postpone Indefinitely (see Chapter 9).
Sessions of more than one day: If a member exhausts his rights to speak on a motion and the motion is carried forward to a meeting on the next day, his rights to debate the motion are completely restored.
Getting around the rules by changing the limits of debate
By using the motion to Limit or Extend the Limits of Debate (see Chapter 9), you have some options to change the default rules of ten minutes per speech and two speeches per person.
You can make changes as follows:
Adopt a special rule of order. Taking this approach (see Chapter 2) can establish a different length for speeches or change the number of speeches permitted. A special rule of order makes the changes basically permanent because special rules supersede Robert’s Rules. However, they can still be changed temporarily, just like Robert’s Rules.
Adopt a rule for a single session. By a two-thirds vote without notice at any meeting, your group can adopt an incidental main motion to change the rules for time and length of speeches per person for one session only. You also can set a period for debate and a time for the vote.
Adopt a rule for a particular motion. With this approach, you can change the limits of number and duration of speeches or the total time for debate of the motion; you can also set a time for debate to close, or set a limit for the number of pro and con speakers, or determine a workable combination of these. Adopting a rule for a particular motion takes a two-thirds vote.
Knowing when it’s okay to interrupt
Most people were taught (or, at least, were told) that it’s never polite to interrupt someone who’s speaking. That etiquette rule works when it comes to interviews, dinner parties, and the like, but not when you’re dealing with Robert’s Rules. During debate in a business meeting, interrupting a speaker is often necessary to protect your rights or the rights of the other members.
Your presiding officer’s duty is to know when interruptions are permissible and to recognize you for such things as points of order or giving notice. Recognized members who have begun to speak are entitled to their time, but they can be interrupted (using the motions in the following list) for specific purposes, if urgency requires it.
Motions that can interrupt a speaker who is speaking and that don’t require a second:
• Call for Orders of the Day
• Point of Order/Call a member to order
• Call for a separate vote on a series of independent resolutions or main motions dealing with different subjects that have been offered under one main motion
• Requests (Withdraw a Motion, Permission to Read Papers)
• Parliamentary Inquiry
• Request for Information (sometimes called Point of Information)
• Call for Division of the Assembly
• Raise a Question of Privilege
Motions that can interrupt a speaker who is speaking but that must be seconded:
• Appeal
• A motion to grant the maker’s own request
Motions that are in order when another speaker has been recognized but has not yet begun to speak:
• Notice of intent to make a motion requiring such notice (before the speaker assigned the floor has begun to speak; no second required)
• Objection to Consideration of the Question (not after the mover has begun to speak; no second required)
• A motion to Reconsider (but not reconsideration itself; must be seconded)
• A motion to Reconsider and Enter on the Minutes (must be seconded)
Playing Nice: Decorum in Debate
Nothing stands to ruin an organization’s spirit and sense of group pride quicker than an acrimonious debate. When debate gets heated and personal, good members quit, and the antagonists generally don’t have what it takes to keep the organization going.
Nobody likes acrimony, and nothing need keep you from having a spirited debate while still keeping discussion focused on the issues. The following list contains some points to keep in mind when the soup gets thick at meetings where you talk about a dues increase or what to do with a budget surplus:
Listen to the other side. You expect the presiding officer to protect your right to speak even if it turns out that you’re a minority of one. You also expect the other members to hear you out and to allow you the same time as everybody else to get in your two cents’ worth. Give your fellow members their rightful turn. Listen to them — you may hear something that affects the way you think.
Focus on issues, not personalities. You don’t want somebody across the aisle saying about you, “I don’t see how that idiot who just spoke can even hold a job, with as much sense as he has about spending money!” It’s much better to just stick to the issues. You may disagree with the point, but you won’t feel personally attacked if your opponent simply says, “If we make this purchase at this time, we’ll have less money in the treasury than I think we need to maintain.”
Avoid questioning motives. It’s not a good idea to say, “Mr. Chairman, the dweeb who just spoke is obviously trying to raise the salary of the executive director because he wants to get the director fired and hire his own brother-in-law.” The dweeb may, in fact, be glad to see the director go, and he may indeed be working to set up a raise for the next employee, hoping it’s his brother-in-law. But when you’re in the meeting, express your opinion based on the proposal’s merits. Try saying, “Raising the salary of the executive director is unwise at this time because we haven’t yet completed the assessment of a performance review.”
Address remarks through the chair. One of the ways things can deteriorate quickly is by forgetting the rule that requires you to address the chair, not a member directly, during debate. Instead of turning to the member who made the motion to buy a fire truck and asking, “Just how much money do you think we need to spend on the fire truck?” try, “Madam Chairman, I’d like to ask how much money the member suggests we allocate to the purchase of the fire truck.”
Use titles, not names. Things are more likely to stay impersonal if you avoid using names during debate. Refer to “the secretary” instead of “George.” Refer to “The member who offered the motion” rather than “Myrtle.” It feels a bit formal, but the idea is to keep the focus on issues, not individuals.
Be polite. Don’t get the floor and start reading some paper, don’t argue with the presiding officer except by legitimate appeal, and don’t do anything that otherwise disturbs the assembly.
At some point, you’ve probably been in a meeting listening to something of interest, and Mr. Sluggo behind you isn’t the least bit interested. He starts talking about how his pet parakeet is better looking than the lady at the microphone. He’s disturbing the assembly with his distracting chatter, but Robert’s Rules comes to your rescue with a way to remind Sluggo that his chatter isn’t appropriate. If you have to handle such a disturbance and you can’t deal with it quickly and quietly in your place, rise to a Question of Privilege that the buzz and chatter are affecting your ability to hear the speaker, and let the chair help you out. See Chapter 10 for more details on this privileged motion and how to use it.
Dealing with Disruption: Dilatory and Improper Motions
The purpose of Robert’s Rules (and parliamentary procedure in general) is to facilitate the transaction of business and to achieve the deliberate will of the majority after giving the minority a full hearing of its position, with full consideration of the rights of all the members, whether present or not.
However, some people learn about a few different types of motions and think they can use them to force their will on the group or to thwart the process that rules of order are designed to protect.
Everybody has run into Bully Bruce, the antagonistic malcontent who stirs up trouble and tries to get his way by raising baseless points of order and appeals, or by making motions to adjourn every few minutes. These motions have their rightful place in the big picture, but if they’re used to hinder business instead of help it, they’re properly termed dilatory and should be ruled out of order by the chair. After all, it’s the chairman’s job to protect the assembly from jerks like Bully Bruce.
Dilatory motions include motions that are
Misused with the purpose of obstructing business (such as the Bully Bruce motions just described)
Absurd in substance
Frivolous, especially amendments
Unwarranted (such as calling “Division” when the result is clear)
Just as disruptive are the motions Robert describes as improper. Improper motions are those that
Are inconsistent with the organization’s charter, bylaws, or procedural laws
Conflict with an adopted motion that hasn’t been rescinded
Present essentially the same question that was defeated earlier in the same meeting
Present a question that the membership still has within its reach (as it has when something has been postponed or referred to a committee, or is the object of a motion to Reconsider)
Are outside the scope of the purpose of the organization (unless the motion is agreed to be considered by a two-thirds vote)
A meeting’s success depends upon the good faith of the members and leaders to give everybody their say, but not at the expense of letting a troublemaker take over.
In his book Parliamentary Law (1923), General Robert says, “The greatest lesson for democracies to learn is for the majority to give to the minority a full, free opportunity to present their side of the case, and then for the minority, having failed to win a majority to their views, gracefully to submit and to recognize the action as that of the entire organization, and cheerfully to assist in carrying it out until they can secure its repeal.” That excerpt says it all!