I wish someone would have educated Mr. West on how voting works in a parliamentary system. His "abstention" was meaningless by definition. When voting in a committee or subcommittee, an abstention means "not voting", and does not mean "voting no." So if there are 18 people and 10 vote yes and 8 abstain, the vote passes "unanimously" with no "no" votes registered for the record. Only a "no" vote makes a record of opposition to the measure. Therefore West's abstention actually says as a practical matter, "I can live with whatever the others want to do. I don't disagree with the 'yes' or 'no' sides." It is a member's "duty" to vote yes or no, and not to abstain, but since the rules can't force a person to vote yes or no, abstentions are always allowed as indicating "present but not voting." Here Cornel West refused to live up to his duty and vote "no." How sad that even a University Professor has not been taught the meaning of voting within the parliamentary systems that we have in the U.S.A.
I wish someone would have educated Mr. West on how voting works in a parliamentary system. His "abstention" was meaningless by definition. When voting in a committee or subcommittee, an abstention means "not voting", and does not mean "voting no." So if there are 18 people and 10 vote yes and 8 abstain, the vote passes "unanimously" with no "no" votes registered for the record. Only a "no" vote makes a record of opposition to the measure. Therefore West's abstention actually says as a practical matter, "I can live with whatever the others want to do. I don't disagree with the 'yes' or 'no' sides." It is a member's "duty" to vote yes or no, and not to abstain, but since the rules can't force a person to vote yes or no, abstentions are always allowed as indicating "present but not voting." Here Cornel West refused to live up to his duty and vote "no." How sad that even a University Professor has not been taught the meaning of voting within the parliamentary systems that we have in the U.S.A.