Louisiana House Bill HR47

Louisiana 2010 Regular Session

• Introduced: 4/28/10
• Refer: 4/28/10
• Report Pass: 5/5/10

Caption

Prohibits a member from changing his vote after the result of the vote has been announced by the presiding officer

Impact

If adopted, House Resolution 47 would significantly alter the procedural dynamics of voting within the House. The amendment would eliminate the current provisions that allow legislators to change their votes during a roll call, thereby enhancing the finality of voting outcomes. This change represents an effort to mitigate any possible manipulations or last-minute changes that could affect legislative decisions. It may also encourage representatives to be more judicious in their voting decisions, knowing that they would not have the option to alter a vote once it has been announced.

Summary

House Resolution 47 seeks to amend existing House rules by prohibiting members of the Louisiana House of Representatives from changing their votes after the presiding officer has announced the results of the vote. The reasoning behind this proposed rule change is to ensure greater integrity and transparency in the voting process of the house, ensuring that once a vote has been cast and counted, the outcome is final and cannot be altered. This aims to strengthen the confidence of both members and the public in the legislative process.

Sentiment

The overall sentiment towards HR47 appears to be supportive among its proponents, who emphasize the importance of maintaining the integrity of legislative procedures. They argue that the clarity and finality brought about by this rule change will foster trust in the legislative process. However, it may face some opposition from those who argue that the ability to change one's vote is sometimes necessary to account for changes in understanding or information after a vote is cast, indicating a potential conflict between procedural integrity and flexibility.

Contention

Notable points of contention in the discussion surrounding HR47 could include concerns about the rigidness of the proposed rules and whether they allow sufficient room for circumstances where a change in vote may be warranted. Members who value adaptability in legislative procedures might argue against losing the flexibility to modify votes. As such, the debate might not only focus on the procedural implications but also on the broader philosophy of governance and legislative accountability.