New Member to Commission

[Ludloe Bushmac]

Is there a provision in Roberts Rules of Order for a newly elected member to remove himself from the vote without having to abstain, which I understand serves as a no vote? The new member hasn’t had enough time to have studied a very complicated issue, and a vote needs to be taken.

[Weldon Merritt]

If you are present but don't vote, you have abstained. That is the meaning of abstention, to refrain from voting. But contary to your understanding, an abstention does not "serve as a no vote." It is simply not a vote of any kind. In some instances (if your rules reauire a majoity of teh entire commission or a majority of those present) an abstention may have the same effect as a no vot, but it still is not a vote. Even in those cases, there is no way you can "remove [yourself] from the vote," if you are present, other than by abstaining.

[David A Foulkes]

Is there a provision in Roberts Rules of Order for a newly elected member to remove himself from the vote without having to abstain[?]

One way to achieve this goal is to not attend the meeting. I can't think of any others at the moment. But, most likely either way, the effect will be the same, so why not just abstain?

[Guest Edgar]

Is there a provision in Roberts Rules of Order for a newly elected member to remove himself from the vote without having to abstain, which I understand serves as a no vote?

See FAQ #6.

The new member hasn’t had enough time to have studied a very complicated issue, and a vote needs to be taken.

I suspect that even some of those members with "enough time" might not fully understand this very complicated issue. And they'll probably vote. It happens all the time. When in doubt, there's nothing wrong with voting "no" and preserving the status quo.

ZYyYBH