-
This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
“I Move To Strike the Last Word”
- Thread starter Rexedgar
- Start date
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2010
- Messages
- 71,926
- Reaction score
- 58,449
- Location
- NE Ohio
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
I don't
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2012
- Messages
- 29,024
- Reaction score
- 10,156
- Location
- Columbus, OH
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Moderate
It means that a member does not want the last speaker to have the final word on the topic raised and moves to speak on the matter.
ocean515
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2013
- Messages
- 36,760
- Reaction score
- 15,468
- Location
- Southern California
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Other
I found this:
For those wondering about the title of this post, to “strike the last word” means to offer a pro-forma amendment such that you can get 5-minutes to speak on the actual amendment. Under the rules, only one 5-minute speech in support of an amendment and one 5-minute speech against it are allowed. But by motioning to “strike the last word,” you are technically offering a 2nd-degree amendment, which gives you five minutes. The 2nd degree amendment is never voted on, and after you are done the floor simply moves to the next person seeking to strike the last word.
- Joined
- Sep 16, 2012
- Messages
- 49,503
- Reaction score
- 55,154
- Location
- Tucson, AZ
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
Seems to mean, "I want to talk now". Can't say I've heard it done that way before.
- Joined
- Jul 28, 2013
- Messages
- 25,834
- Reaction score
- 25,190
- Location
- Ohio
- Gender
- Female
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
They sure do like to talk a lot. The last Democrat to talk is a new member of Congress and I thought she was going to break out singing "I'm a Yankee Doodle Dandy" after spending 4 minutes trashing Trump. You know what scares me about all of this? The Democrats seem to be on a mission to weaken or destroy Executive presidential privilege.
- Joined
- Sep 16, 2012
- Messages
- 49,503
- Reaction score
- 55,154
- Location
- Tucson, AZ
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
That's exactly what this is all about. They want a parliamentary government rather than a Constitutional Republic. They can't get a social justice system in without making that change.
- Joined
- Jul 28, 2013
- Messages
- 25,834
- Reaction score
- 25,190
- Location
- Ohio
- Gender
- Female
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
And an overbearing parliamentary government is exactly what was occurring in Great Britain when the Founders were comprising the Constitution. They had lived it and rejected it.
- Joined
- Sep 16, 2012
- Messages
- 49,503
- Reaction score
- 55,154
- Location
- Tucson, AZ
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
Interestingly enough, tonight in the UK it's the Conservatives who ran roughshod over the progressives.
- Joined
- Jul 28, 2013
- Messages
- 25,834
- Reaction score
- 25,190
- Location
- Ohio
- Gender
- Female
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
I really didn't see that happening. My goodness they tromped the Labor Party. Woot!
- Joined
- Sep 30, 2012
- Messages
- 5,335
- Reaction score
- 3,089
- Location
- Toronto
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
You do realize how ridiculously paranoid such an idiotic attribution of motive sounds, don't you?
It amazes me how ignorant of the constitution so many supposed american patriots are. Nonsense designed to demonize, alienate and reinforce - dems bad.
Worse they are oblivious to the fact that when ignorance is coupled with smearing attacks and accusations against the institutions of american greatness; the dedicated people who serve their nation; and fellow citizens who don't think, look or act like them (take you pick of any or all), they are a true threat to the republic and its constitution.
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2018
- Messages
- 60,632
- Reaction score
- 6,447
- Location
- Norcross, Georgia
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
Why can't a parliamentary form of government be Constitutional ?
Why can't a Republic have a parliamentary system ?
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2017
- Messages
- 13,590
- Reaction score
- 5,290
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Slightly Liberal
That's an interesting point... are the Democrats on a mission to weaken/destroy Executive privilege? I don't think so. If anything, I think the President has been abusing it. The "absolute privilege" the President claims simply doesn't exist under law. All of the subpoenaed witnesses should have been compelled to appear before Congress and if specific questions strayed into areas covered by Executive privilege, then could have refused to answer the question by claiming the privilege.
I find the contrast between the Reagan Administration during Iran-Contra hearings and the Trump Administration today to be particularly stark. Back then, all of the Congressional subpoenas were answered - you had members of cabinet, former National Security Advisors, and White House staff (including the Chief of Staff) all testifying. Hell, the President even opened up portions of his personal diary! President Reagan didn't make any sweeping assertions of "absolute privilege" because he didn't feel he had anything to hide.... he knew it was probably going to be politically embarrassing, but he accepted responsibility for what happened and he was willing to put the good of the country above his own interests.
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2018
- Messages
- 60,632
- Reaction score
- 6,447
- Location
- Norcross, Georgia
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
"House rules say that each amendment can only be debated for 10 minutes – five minutes for those in support, and five minutes for those opposed. But, members of Congress love to hear themselves speak sometimes.
That’s why they use a little trick. That trick is called offering a pro forma amendment. Pro Forma, in Latin, means "for the sake of form," or, a formality.
That’s exactly what a pro forma amendment is. As a formality, a member can simply say they’re offering an amendment to the amendment under debate, and get their own five minutes to speak. They never even have to submit a real amendment. Just verbally saying they’re offering one, as a formality, gives them five minutes.
When a member says they "move to strike the last word" it, too, is part of that formality. They’re asking to strike, or delete, the very last word of the amendment under debate, indicating that they’re offering a pro forma amendment to replace that last word..."
Markup Marathon: What Does "Strike the Last Word" Mean? - Countable
That’s why they use a little trick. That trick is called offering a pro forma amendment. Pro Forma, in Latin, means "for the sake of form," or, a formality.
That’s exactly what a pro forma amendment is. As a formality, a member can simply say they’re offering an amendment to the amendment under debate, and get their own five minutes to speak. They never even have to submit a real amendment. Just verbally saying they’re offering one, as a formality, gives them five minutes.
When a member says they "move to strike the last word" it, too, is part of that formality. They’re asking to strike, or delete, the very last word of the amendment under debate, indicating that they’re offering a pro forma amendment to replace that last word..."
Markup Marathon: What Does "Strike the Last Word" Mean? - Countable