I would read it again, but I do remind the clerk that there have been other committees that have ruled motions like this out of order for being argumentative. I really think we should refer back to other examples from other committees before we proceed with something like this, since it has already happened, instead of being forced to accept something here when I've made a very valid point.
If you want to use the words “in compliance”, it's not. We're not to be passing motions that are argumentative or in the form of a speech. And that's exactly what this is. The other rulings were specific to preambles from other committees, so I really would like some comments from the clerk that she is solid on this, that she knows that what's happening right now is 100% okay, that she hasn't called and asked somebody to give her any more advice to tell her that she is doing the right thing, and that we should proceed.