After much drawn-out debate, Illinois Student Senators decided to not pass, pass and then further not to pass the standing rule for a pro-con debate.

The resolution, written by Kevin Seymour, treasurer and graduate student, proposed the creation of a round of pro-con debate, which would allow all senators the opportunity to speak before being interjected by a call to a previous question. This means senators would end debate and proceed directly to a vote.

During the meeting, the resolution first did not pass under a two-thirds vote, which Brock Gebhardt, student body president, said was the correct method of deciding on the resolution. The decision was later questioned by Seymour who said a simple majority was the correct method for deciding the matter, which the resolution did receive.

Senators took two recesses to huddle parliamentarian and College of Law students over a small book of Robert’s Rules of Order, to come to a conclusion — thrice.

According to Robert’s Rules of Order, “A two-thirds vote is required to be cast on any resolution that closes, extends or limits the time of debate,” as read by Gebhardt.

A further appeal was made after the resolution did not pass and debate continued on the subject of whether this rule pertained to the situation.

“I don’t have the right to limit debate under this rule,” said Damani Bolden, senator and junior in ACES. “That is against Robert’s Rules of Order.”

Seymour responded that there is nothing confusing about the resolution and that it does not limit freedoms of senators.

“There is nothing limiting (Bolden’s) call to question,” Seymour said. “It is just delaying him to make sure other voices are heard.”

Bolden stated that he believes the final ruling on the merits of the resolution were “superb” and he thanked the chairman.

“Quite often we have talked about the First Amendment,” Bolden said. “I think I have every right to interpret the First Amendment, and I see it fair that I have the ability and right to limit debate.”

An hour and a half into the meeting, Gebhardt called for a final vote. The final vote upheld the two-thirds vote and the motion was lost and therefore not passed.

The senate then moved on to the discussion of the second standing rule of the evening.

Seymour’s second resolution was voted down as well after much criticism that the author was being insensitive to students with disabilities.

The resolution, on a standing rule proposing senators stand while addressing the body, was postponed indefinitely.

Corinne can be reached at [email protected].