Missouri Senate Bill SR3

Missouri 2025 1st Special Session

• Introduced: 6/2/25

Caption

Modifies Senate Rule 84 to require at least two-thirds of the members of the Senate to vote in favor of a motion for the previous question

Summary

Senate Resolution 3 proposes a change to Senate Rule 84 governing the “previous question” motion, which is the procedural motion used to end debate and force an immediate vote. Under the resolution, the motion could be made only on written demand of ten senators and would require approval by at least a two-thirds majority of the senators elected. If adopted, the motion would bring the Senate directly to a vote on any pending motion to commit, then amendments, and finally the main question. The resolution also addresses calls of the Senate during consideration of the previous question. It allows a call of the Senate to be in order when the motion is demanded, but once the two-thirds threshold is met, no call would be permitted before the main question is decided. In practical terms, SR3 would make it harder to cut off debate and would strengthen the ability of a substantial minority to continue deliberation unless a broad supermajority supports ending debate.

Impact

SR3 would amend the Senate’s internal procedural rules rather than change substantive state law. Its effect would be limited to Senate floor procedure, specifically raising the threshold for invoking the previous question and thereby making it more difficult to end debate and force an immediate vote. The resolution would affect senators, legislative leadership, and the chamber’s handling of motions to commit, amendments, and final passage.

Sentiment

The available record shows no committee transcript or recorded vote, so there is no direct evidence of debate or partisan reaction in the materials provided. Based on the text alone, the resolution appears procedural and institutional in nature, likely appealing to members who favor extended deliberation and minority rights, while potentially drawing concern from those who prefer faster floor action and stronger majority control of the agenda.

Contention

The main point of contention is the higher two-thirds requirement for the previous question motion. Supporters of the change would likely view it as a safeguard against premature cutoff of debate and a protection for deliberative process. Opponents would likely argue that it makes it more difficult for the Senate to move efficiently to a vote, especially on contentious measures, and could be used to prolong proceedings or block action by the majority.