Committee 1: Rules of Order

Today we enter the sanctum sanctorum for church nerds: the committee on rules of order. We will look at proposed changes for both the joint rules (for bishops and deputies), as well as those for the House of Deputies. If you are a bishop or a deputy, this stuff is super important. If you’re a mildly interested Episcopalian, you might want to look at other parts of Resolutionpalooza.

Some folks don’t like changes to the rules, because the old system was familiar. Like any system, it could be gamed if you knew how to do so. (And this will still be true.) But the old system relied on a blizzard of activity at convention, with 10 or more 14-hour days. People literally had to run from one room to another, and monitoring resolutions to be able to speak on them required heroic levels of organizing. The new system spreads work out over a longer time, and more of it happens online. This allows people who cannot afford to travel to General Convention for two weeks to be fully involved. And it creates a more humane schedule for bishops and deputies, which allows more fellowship time — possibly just as important as legislative time. I hope we’ll give all these changes a chance, and I expect we’ll need to do some tweaking in 2027. We can all learn together as we continue to improve how our church debates and listens, hopefully under the guidance of the Holy Spirit.

Onward to the resolutions!

Joint Rules of Order

A068 Amend Joint Rules of Order V.1. Full text. Likely vote: YES.

Back in the day, the General Convention chose trustees for the General Theological Seminary. Because of actions by General Convention and General Seminary in 2022, they choose their own trustees now. So this rule of order change simply removes this group from the list of bodies for which the Joint Standing Committee on Nominations must produce a slate of nominees.

 

A069 Amend Joint Rules of Order V.4.c to fix a rounding error in the number of nominees the Joint Standing Committee on Nominations is required to nominate. Full text. Likely vote: YES.

You should always read the explanations for resolutions. On very rare occasions you will be rewarded with wry humor. Take this resolution’s explanation as an example: “In 2022, the 80th General Convention passed Resolution A106 which lowered the number of nominees per vacancy required to be nominated by the Joint Standing Committee on Nominations. In the course of our work this triennium, the Standing Committee realized that for positions with an odd number of vacancies, nominating nominees equal to one and one-half times the number of vacancies would require nominating fractions of a person, and the Committee deemed it un-Christian to follow procedures requiring chopping people into fractions. This resolution clarifies the Joint Rules of Order and offers the Committee a procedure for nominating nominees in a non-violent manner.”

Thank you, Joint Standing Committee on Nominations, for providing some much-appreciated legislative levity.

 

D022 Create a Task Force on the Legislative Process. Full text. Likely vote: NO.

For years (decades), some of us were saying that General Convention needed to modernize how we get stuff done. There was a great deal of stiff resistance to any major evolution. That changed in 2022, when we had to change all sorts of things about General Convention due to the raging pandemic. Now there have been some changes in 2024, making this convention look like a cross between the upended convention of 2022 and other recent ones of the 21st century. This resolution seeks to create a task force to look at legislative process changes, and the budget line is $40,000. While I think we need a rigorous cycle of experimentation, feedback, and ongoing improvement, I’m not convinced a task force is going to help much. After all, the General Convention accepts any proposed rule changes; they are not imposed by outside forces.

I don’t imagine we have got everything right. My sense is that most people understood at some level that General Convention was out of step with our times, and we knew we needed to change. I don’t imagine we’ve landed in the correct spot on all things, but it’s going to take some experience to help us get this sorted. Take, for example, the meetings of legislative committees. I think many folks would agree that the “old way” of early morning and late night legislative committees at General Convention, which lasted two weeks, is not the answer. It’s exhausting for participants, and it disenfranchises any Episcopalian who can’t afford to camp out in a convention center for two weeks. Of necessity, in 2022, all legislative committees met online. That’s exhausting in a different way, and deliberating in little boxes on a screen is not the same as being in the same room. So probably we need a combination of online and in-person meetings. This convention will be the first one to try that. Let’s get through this one, debrief, and then chart a path going forward. This does not require a $40,000 committee.

 

Rules of Order / House of Deputies

A004 Amend the House of Deputies Rule of Order XV.A.3 to Conform it to Current Practice Regarding the Form of Nominations from the Floor of the House. Full text. Likely vote: YES.

This just conforms some language about nominations from the floor at elections to the current practice of the house.

 

A005 Amend the House of Deputies Rules of Order by Adding a New Rule VII.F Referral to the Constitutions and Canons Legislative Committee. Full text. Likely vote: YES.

This change would require that resolutions that modify the constitution or canons be referred to the legislative committee on constitution and canons. This is a very good idea. Resolution writers have good intentions, but may not understand the correct form to modify the canons, and they may not consider the unintended consequences of changes. This referral is for form only, and the committee would not speak on the substance of a resolution unless the presiding officer of the house asks for this report. So this will help us have better resolutions, which is a better use of everyone’s time.

 

A013 Amending HoD Rule of Order XIV [Recording Vote Totals in the Journal]. Full text. Likely vote: YES.

This resolution is referred from General Convention 2022. It would require that the vote tallies for standard electronic votes and votes by orders be recorded in the journal. Transparency is good, and this will not be an onerous task.

 

A149 Amending daily session schedule for House of Deputies. Full text. Likely vote: YES.

This change allows the House of Deputies to vote on a consent calendar of resolutions once each session, instead of once each day. For new folks, a consent calendar is a set of resolutions that are voted on all at once, thus saving the house a lot of time. The explanation reminds us that Deputies will have access to the consent calendar for at least 24 hours, allowing time to read the contents and to work to remove items if desired.

 

A150 Amending the motion to suspend the HOD rules of order. Full text. Likely vote: YES.

This change would allow debate on motions to suspend the rules except if the motion is to extend debate. As the explanation helpfully notes, “Debating on how long to debate can take an extended amount of time from the actual debate on the floor.” So, yes, let’s put this limit in place. Makes perfect sense.

 

A151 Removal from the Consent Calendar in the House of Deputies. Full text. Likely vote: YES.

This is an excellent change, though some will push back against it, I’m sure. Essentially, this makes the consent calendar the default for resolutions, unless the item cannot be on the calendar for various reasons or the committee on dispatch removes it. There are some other sensible mechanisms to remove resolutions, including the provision that twenty deputies can get together and pull something off. That might seem like a big number, but it’s quite easy to find enough folks out of 800+ deputies if there’s a compelling reason. But quite often when someone wants to pull an item off the consent calendar and require debate, it’s because a person wants attention for a particular cause. That’s not an effective use of the house’s time. This change keeps things moving, while also allowing either a group of deputies or various others to remove items when needed.

 

A152 Resolution Submission Deadline in House of Deputies Rules of Order. Full text. Likely vote: YES.

This resolution concerns the deadline for submitting resolutions. The deadline for ordinary resolutions has been the second legislative day of General Convention, which, among other problems, leaves no time for decent translations into languages other than English. In an effort to allow time for translation, for voting participants to read the material, for legislative research reports, and for resolution review, the standard deadline would be set at 90 days before convention. On nearly every matter, there’s no reason to delay submitting materials, so this earlier deadline allows a more reasoned and deliberate consideration of resolutions. What about late-breaking developments, you say? Legislative committees can submit resolutions any time, as can dioceses or provinces, the PHoD, and any 20 deputies. (I’m simplifying.) Again, 20 might seem like a big number, but for important matters it will not be difficult at all to organize 2.5% of the house. These rules do NOT stifle deliberation, as some might claim. Rather, they support deliberation by allowing deputies and bishops time to read the resolutions they’re voting on. An early deadline is the only way to have translations available, so an early deadline is the inclusive choice. This also allows time for people to do background research and so on. This is a good proposal, and there are still provisions for last-minute resolutions when an urgent matter arises.

 

A153 Change to House of Deputies Debate Rules. Full text. Likely vote: YES.

In the old system, if you wanted to amend a resolution, you needed to race to a podium at just the right moment to get your amendment to the top of the queue. Debate on amendments could chew up a lot of time, and the process was generally chaotic, favoring people who could run fast or who were seated close to a podium. This new system favors transparency and orderly debate. Amendments are filed in advance and considered in the order they are received. This means deputies can review amendments in advance. These new rules keep the previous provision that during the first six minutes of debate, “no one may move to amend, substitute, or end the debate, unless no one wishes to speak on the matter.” This prevents parliamentary hijacking and allows the house to deliberate in an orderly way for a few minutes. Then amendments would be considered in the order they were submitted. No racing to the mic. No mystery. Orderly debate and discussion.

 

A154 Presubmission of Amendments in the House of Deputies. Full text. Likely vote: YES.

This requires primary amendments (not amendments to amendments) to be prefiled, which allows deputies to review them in advance. It also allows translation. Once a primary amendment is on the floor, it could be subject to a “live” secondary amendment, which need not be prefiled. With this, and with all these changes, you should read the full resolution, because I am summarizing. I try to be accurate, but I can’t include all the details in these comments.

 

A155 Update the House of Deputies Rules Upon a Different Convention Schedule. Full text. Likely vote: YES.

There is a parliamentary maneuver to pull a resolution from a legislative committee directly to the floor of the house. This resolution would allow this to happen starting the second, not the fourth, legislative day. This makes sense given shorter conventions and more work done in advance.

 

A156 House of Deputies Rules of Order on Written Comments. Full text. Likely vote: YES.

I’ll quote a bit of the explanation here (there’s more), because I think it explains what’s going on with this proposal. “The introduction of written testimony allows individuals to contribute their insights even if they cannot attend the committee sessions. This inclusivity ensures that more diverse perspectives can be considered. This change also simplifies the submission of minor technical changes and grammatical corrections. By submitting them in writing, it is easier for the Committee to track such changes. In the spirit of transparency and openness, comments and feedback received will be published, providing an additional layer of accountability and visibility to the legislative process.” This allows legislative committees to be more inclusive in hearing the voices of the whole church.

 

A157 House of Deputies Rules on Legislative Committee Report Deadline. Full text. Likely vote: YES.

This resolution sets deadlines for legislative committee reports, which will ordinarily be seven days before the start of convention. I quote from the explanation: “The focus is to encourage most work to be conducted in advance, so time at convention can be focused on considering resolutions. But at the same time it allows the Committee themselves to defer consideration of a resolution to the Convention to meet in person if the Committee feels that the resolution needs and in-person hearing.” As this says, there is a provision for a committee to vote to issue their report at convention, which would allow them to meet in person to discuss a resolution when desired.