Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Procedural Fairness topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Jones urges nine rule changes to guard minority voice and require visible votes; panel rejects them in roll call
Summary
Representative Jones proposed nine amendments — including a 0.75 threshold to call the question, board/roll‑call voting, limits on calling questions and timing rules for amendments — charging the process was rushed and that transparency was lacking; the committee rejected his package 3–8 on roll call.
Representative Jones framed his nine rule amendments as necessary safeguards to protect minority voices during the expedited special session. "No matter what rules are passed... we have to be clear that this is about race," he said at the outset and repeatedly argued that procedural shortcuts could silence constituents.
His amendments included raising the threshold to call the question to 0.75 of lawmakers present; requiring timely submission of amendments (he proposed at least one hour prior); maintaining a written, clerk‑maintained list of lawmakers who sign up to speak; preventing a speaker from recognizing another member while someone is still speaking unless time is yielded; requiring votes be taken on the board or by roll call (no voice votes); requiring separate votes on an amendment and the bill it amends; allowing members to reclaim yielded time; mandating 24‑hour notice for bills; and permitting visual aids such as enlarged maps in committee.
Jones and others criticized the committee for turning off voting boards and for the rapid timetable on maps and bills. The chair agreed to a roll‑call vote to address transparency concerns. The clerk recorded votes and reported the measure failed 3–8 (three ayes, eight noes). Jones urged the majority to allow a fuller public process and said he hoped the rules he proposed might still influence future practice.
