Abstain From Abstaining

A B S T A I N F R O M A B S T A I N I N G

By Lorenzo R. Cuesta, PRP

One of the most misapplied parliamentary concepts is the right to abstain.

In accordance with Robert’s Rules, the proper voting procedure is to ask, “Those in favor of the motion, say aye. Those opposed [to the motion], say no.” RONR (12th ed.) 4:37. The common practice in most clients’ meetings is, “Those in favor, say aye. Those opposed, say, no. Anyone abstain?”

Habitually asking for abstentions as part of every voting procedure conflicts with Robert’s Rules. The chair should not call for abstentions in taking a vote. The logic here is that to abstain means not to vote at all. The question is meaningless because not voting, or answering that one abstains, or not answering at all, results in the same non-vote. RONR (12th ed.) 4:35.

When one may abstain

1. Robert’s Rules does state that a member “can abstain, since he cannot be compelled to vote.” RONR (12th ed.) 45:3. The right to abstain is proper as long as it does not conflict with an authority that is ranked higher than Robert’s Rules, e.g., the society’s constitution or bylaws. This right to abstain is common in societies where each member has the power to vote entirely upon his own interests and wishes, such as a club or a society with a general assembly where each member has the sole power over his own vote and no one else’s. 2. A member has the right to express his opinion on a question. The parliamentary means of communicating his opinion is “to express it by his vote.” RONR (12th ed.) 45:3. If a member cannot be compelled to vote, RONR (12th ed.) 45:3, and he chooses to abstain, that member chooses to remain neutral and silence his opinion on the matter. In order to remain neutral and silence his opinion, that member should not participate or have any impact on the final disposition of the motion. This includes not making the motion, or seconding it, or amending it. Additionally, the member who chooses to abstain should not participate in debate or by influencing the other voters through actions or body language. He might as well momentarily leave the assembly.

When one may NoT abstain

Robert’s Rules yields to the association’s documents of governance, especially the association’s constitution and bylaws. Typically, these documents define the obligation of the voting members. In most of the situations where the services of a parliamentarian are essential, a board of directors or a convention of delegates constitute the voting members. In each of these cases, the society’s constitution or bylaws define the voting members’ role as an obligation to reflect the voice of their constituents. After all, every such voting member represents hundreds or thousands of members who have no right to vote at the board or convention. It is inaccurate and presumptuous for such a voting member to vote by saying, “I vote in favor/against the motion.” No board member or delegate votes exclusively for himself. Each such voting member is the voice of a group of constituents that are relying on the voting member to reflect the will of the constituents.

Constituents do not elect a delegate or board member to vote for them, and then instruct that voting member to attend the business meeting and not vote. A delegate or board member is elected to serve as a champion for the interests of the constituency. Silence is not service.

Technically, when a chair does not vote, he is not abstaining. He is protecting his impartiality by voting only during a secret vote, or when he wishes to have an impact on the decision by causing or breaking a tie or a 2/3 vote. RONR (12th ed.) 45:3.

Members who wish to abstain often give the following inadequate excuses

1. I must remain neutral in front of my voting friends. The reflection of the constituents’ voice is critical. Their voice must not be denied or reduced by the voter’s need to satisfy friends on the board or at the convention. Obligation to friends on a board is too often averse to loyalty to the constituents. 2. I cannot vote for the minutes because I missed that meeting. The voting member received a timely notice of the meeting and had time to study or hear the minutes. If the voting member later discovers an error in the minutes, he can move to amend the minutes weeks or months later. The right to vote cannot be denied except through disciplinary proceedings. RONR (12th ed.) 1:4. Anyway, a formal motion to approve the minutes is not necessary, especially since the goal is primarily to correct the minutes. RONR (12th ed.) 41:10. 3. I cannot vote because I am confused on the issue. The voting member had plenty of time during the handling of the motion to request information, to debate, and to listen to both sides. Additionally,

the member had an obligation to prepare for the meeting based on the shared content of the timely call of the meeting. 4. I am indifferent to this motion because it does not affect my constituents.

Although a voting member has the fiduciary obligation to serve as the voice of a limited constituency, his primary duty as a voting member is to participate in the decisions that affect the entire membership. 5. I must recuse myself from voting because I have a conflict of interest.

Under Robert’s Rules, a conflict of interest is defined as having “a direct personal or pecuniary interest not common to other members.” RONR (12th ed.) 45:4. In these cases, Robert’s does not prohibit the vote, instead simply recommends that the member should not vote. “However, no member can be compelled to refrain from voting in such circumstances.”

RONR (12th ed.) 45:4. 6. I must recuse myself because the motion includes me.

If a member were not allowed to vote for a motion that included him, no one would ever be able to vote for a motion that involved the entire membership. After all, the voting member is a member of the entire membership. Additionally, a majority would never be able to protect itself from being expelled by a small minority. Furthermore, the practice of prohibiting voting members from voting if the motion includes them would be an illegal means of discouraging a member from running for an office position being that he could not count on his own vote in a close race. RONR (12th ed.) 45:5. 7. I strongly disagree with this motion.

An abstention is not a stronger means of voting in the negative.

The services of a parliamentarian are generally not required at a meeting if the meeting involves a small, local gathering where every member votes solely for his own interests. The services of a parliamentarian are typically required when the votes of the membership are delegated to the members of a board or a convention. The voting members in the former situation have every right to abstain. The voting members in the latter situation have an obligation to abstain from abstaining. NP

Lorenzo R. cuesta is a Professional Registered Parliamentarian.

He has served as a parliamentarian for boards, conventions, and annual meetings in and beyond California for more than 20 years. He is a frequent contributor to National Parliamentarian and an annual workshop presenter at the NAP convention and conference. (http://www.roberts-rules.com, email: parliam@roberts-rules.com)