Home › How to Conduct a Debate › IX. Two-Thirds Vote

IX. Two-Thirds Vote

There is no such thing naturally as the necessity of a two-thirds vote. By the rules of order, a majority suffices to order the previous question, to limit the time of speeches, to limit the debate-which last is virtually ordering the previous question at a fixed hour-or to consider a question when objected to; while to suspend the rules, or amend them, or to make a special order, or to move for the discussion of a nondebatable question, or to take up a question out of its order-the three last amounting to a suspension of the rules-requires unanimous consent.

But while this is the practice in legislative bodies, in ordinary organizations, where celerity in the dispatch of business is not of great importance, where the previous question is looked upon as a device to prevent the minority from expressing an opinion, and where a suspension of the rules is more frequently necessary, the following special rule is sometimes adopted:

It shall require a two-thirds vote of the members present at any meeting to call the previous question, to limit debate, to fix a specified hour for closing debate, to consider a question when objected to on its introduction, to make a special order, to suspend, or to amend the rules, to order the discussion of a subject non-debatable under the rules, or to take up a question out of its order.

This may be placed in the constitution or by-laws of the society, when it will become paramount law, to which the rules of order opposed to it must yield.

The safest mode, however, will be found to adhere to the parliamentary rules.