Felt’s Parliamentary Procedure/To Postpone Indefinitely

by Orson B. Felt

Layout 2

TO POSTPONE INDEFINITELY.

122. The object of this motion is to defeat the question by removing it from before the assembly for that session. After an affirmative decision on the postponement the question upon which it is moved or any question of substantially the same nature cannot be again introduced at that session.

The motion to postpone is not only debatable as to the propriety of postponing, but it also opens to debate the merits of the whole range of pending propositions to as great an extent as if they were directly before the assembly. It cannot be amended, postponed, committed, or tabled, but may be reconsidered. It cannot be applied to any subsidiary question alone, but if moved while a subsidiary motion is pending it relates to the main question also.

Note.—Some authorities hold that the motion for indefinite postponement should have no place in parliamentary law, or at least should be allowed only when authorized by special rule, because the object of the mover, which is not to postpone, but to defeat the question, could be accomplished as quickly and effectually by a negative vote on the main question. Further, since an affirmative vote on the postponement is equivalent to a negative vote on the main question, the use of this motion not only gives the opponents of the measure the advantage of an affirmative vote, which is an important one where the members are indifferent as to the result, but also serves to furnish the opponents of the main question a test of strength at any stage of the proceedings without any risk to themselves or advantage to the friends of the measure except such as results from such an exhibition of strength. If the postponement is lost the opposition would still have another opportunity to defeat the main question when it comes to a final vote. This use of the motion is strategic one, valuable when the opposition is doubtful of its strength. On the other hand, in spite of the reasons offered against the motion to postpone indefinitely, it is, if properly used, simple and helpful, and it is, therefore, recommended.

Because the motion to amend is generally regarded as higher in rank than indefinite postponement, some authorities hold that it is not in order to move to postpone indefinitely while an amendment is pending; but that it is in order after the amendment has been acted upon, and the main question, either amended or not amended, is before the assembly. This, however, is not now the practice in deliberative assemblies, unless authorized by special rule.

(See also note to Sec. 73c.)