2/3 majority vote and abstention votes

[Guest ed]

Do abstention votes count?

Answer:

The phrase "abstention votes" is an oxymoron, an abstention being a refusal to vote. To abstain means to refrain from voting, and, as a consequence, there can be no such thing as an "abstention vote."

In the usual situation, where either a majority vote or a two-thirds vote is required, abstentions have absolutely no effect on the outcome of the vote since what is required is either a majority or two thirds of the votes cast. On the other hand, if the vote required is a majority or two thirds of the members present, or a majority or two thirds of the entire membership, an abstention will have the same effect as a "no" vote. Even in such a case, however, an abstention is not a vote. [RONR (10th ed.), p. 387, l. 7-13; p. 388, l. 3-6; p. 390, l. 13-24; see also p.66 of RONR In Brief.]

To be precise then, when approval is necessary by two-thirds majority of the group, abstentions are totaled with the "no" votes, correct? Or, since they are not votes, they are not counted, period?

[hmtcastle]

To be precise then, when approval is necessary by two-thirds majority of the group, abstentions are totaled with the "no" votes, correct? Or, since they are not votes, they are not counted, period?

They are not counted but their effect is felt.

For example, If your organization has 100 members, all members are present at a meeting, and you get 66 affirmative votes, the motion would fail. It doesn't matter if the other 34 members voted "no" or abstained, the effect is the same: you didn't get the vote of (at least) two-thirds of the (entire) membership.

[Trina]

....

To be precise then, when approval is necessary by two-thirds majority of the group, abstentions are totaled with the "no" votes, correct? Or, since they are not votes, they are not counted, period?

The abstentions aren't votes. However, if approval by two-thirds of the entire group is clearly specified, then that's what you need. It's true that abstaining will have the same effect as voting 'no' in that circumstance, but that still doesn't mean that an abstention IS a 'no' vote.

Why do you believe it matters how the abstentions are counted? What potential difference in outcome do you see?

[Rev Ed]

It all depends on the what the 2/3 vote is out of.

Assuming there are 100 members, and 75 of them are present at a meeting, here are the different possiblities:

1) If it is 2/3 of all members, then there must be 67 "yes" votes. Anyone who abstains, or is not present, has the same effect a a "no" vote.

2) If it is a 2/3 majority of votes cast, then an abstention has no effect on the vote. If 60 of those 75 people vote, then 40 will be sufficient as 40 is 2/3 of 60.

3) If the vote is 2/3 of those present, then 50 of those 75 must vote "yes" and an abstention has the same effect as a "no" vote as 2/3 of all those members present must vote "yes."

[Kim Goldsworthy]

... when approval is necessary by two-thirds majority of the group, abstentions are totaled with the "no" votes, correct?

Technically, no.

According to RONR, the chair is to do two things when the vote threshold is based on those present (as opposed to the default standard, present AND voting):

1. count the affirmative votes

2. count the total number of members present, after the affirmative vote.

(see page 390.)

Note that the the chair NEVER counts (1.) the negative vote; (2.) the abstentions; when the voting threshold is based on members present.

That is The Book.

[Matt Schafer]

To be precise then, when approval is necessary by two-thirds majority of the group, abstentions are totaled with the "no" votes, correct? Or, since they are not votes, they are not counted, period?

ed, I want to make sure we're answering the question that you intend. A "two-thirds majority of the group" can be interpreted the wrong way. Do you mean:

1. A two-thirds vote is required to adopt the motion;
   
2. A two-thirds vote of the members present is required to adopt; or
   
3. A two-thirds vote of all members is required to adopt?
   

For any of these three conditions, the abstention votes are not counted.

For number 1, if the affirmative votes are at least 2/3 of the votes cast (sum of affirmative and negative), the motion is adopted. The abstentions do not affect the result. (If counted, the minutes should show the number of votes cast on both sides.)

For number 2, it is also necessary for the chair to count the number of members present. The chair should take the affirmative vote, then count the number of members present, then take the negative vote. If the affirmative is at least 2/3 of the members who are present, the motion is adopted. So while the abstentions aren't counted, there is no difference in the outcome if the member votes no or abstains. (If counted, the minutes should show the counts of affirmative votes, negative votes, and members present.)

For number 3, it is necessary for the chair to count the affirmative vote and the negative vote, and then the chair should ask the officer whose responsibility it is to maintain the membership roll how many members there are. If the affirmative vote is at least 2/3 of the total number of members in the organization, the motion is adopted. Again, the abstentions are not counted, and there is no effect on the outcome if a member votes no, abstains or doesn't show up at all. (If counted, the minutes should show the counts of affirmative votes, negative votes, and total membership.)

But as you see, the abstentions are never counted.

[Matt Schafer]

Technically, no.

According to RONR, the chair is to do two things when the vote threshold is based on those present (as opposed to the default standard, present AND voting):

1. count the affirmative votes

2. count the total number of members present, after the affirmative vote.

(see page 390.)

Note that the the chair NEVER counts (1.) the negative vote; (2.) the abstentions; when the voting threshold is based on members present.

That is The Book.

Why should the chair not count the negative vote?

When such a vote is required, however, the chair must count those present immediately after the affirmative vote is taken, before any change can take place in attendance.

So the count of those present should happen immediately after the affirmative vote, but nowhere does this paragraph on p. 390 state that the negative vote should not be taken or counted. Furthermore:

The chair must always call for the negative vote [except when the motion is not controversial or has a very low threshold and no member objects.]

So if we're considering a motion that requires the affirmative vote of a certain portion of the members present in order to adopt, and the vote is to be counted, the chair should (1) take the affirmative vote; (2) count all of the members present; (3) then take the negative vote; and finally (4) announce all three counts and the result of the vote, which should then be recorded in the minutes.

[Josh Martin]

According to RONR, the chair is to do two things when the vote threshold is based on those present (as opposed to the default standard, present AND voting):

1. count the affirmative votes

2. count the total number of members present, after the affirmative vote.

(see page 390.)

Note that the the chair NEVER counts (1.) the negative vote; (2.) the abstentions; when the voting threshold is based on members present.

From my understanding of the original post, he's speaking about a situation where a vote of 2/3 of the entire membership is required, so I would think the chair should contact the Secretary or credentials committee to determine the number of member, rather than counting the number of members present.

[Kim Goldsworthy]

Why should the chair not count the negative vote?

Because it makes no difference.

A negative vote of zero, or a negative vote of 99, or a negative vote EQUAL TO THE AFFIRMATIVE VOTE, is irrelevant to the calculation, if the calculation is based on "members present".

Likewise for "total membership". - Taking the negative vote tells you nothing about the winning or losing margin.

Thus, it is a waste of time. Thus, it is truly dilatory.

(To repeat: If the calculation is based on "present and voting", then that is significantly different. -- The negative vote is to be counted, since it is one of the elements you must account for in your calcuation.)

So the count of those present should happen immediately after the affirmative vote, but nowhere does this paragraph on p. 390 state that the negative vote should not be taken or counted.

True. - But there are very few rules in Robert's Rules where Robert's Rules says "Don't do this".

Page 390 gives two steps.

Page 390 does not give two steps plus all the "not to do" things one would do for (a.) calculation based on "present and voting"; (b.) calculation based on "total membership".

You can test this out.

• Assume a rule which requires "a majority of those present."

• Assume the total members PRESENT = 100.

• This makes "51" the threshold for adoption since "a majority of 100" is 51.

• Assume the vote is 10 affirmative.

• Assume (for your sake) that the negative vote is taken, and the negative vote is 10.

Q. Before you do a count of all members PRESENT, does the fact that the affirmative and negative are both the same value change the net result?

Answer: No. If the affirmative were to be 2x more, and/or the negative were to be 2x less, OR VICE VERSA, it makes not a whit of difference in the final calculation.

E.g., 20 ayes and 5 noes = no difference.

E.g., 5 ayes and 20 noes = no difference.

• Now do the calculation:

10 affirmative;

100 present;

10 is SHORT of "a majority of those present" (note: 51 is a majority of 100).

Thus, the motion is rejected.

Q. Does the fact that the negative is GREATER THAN or LESSER THAN the number of affirmative votes alter the result?

A. No. Whatever number the negative vote turns out to be, EVEN IF GREATER THAN THE AFFIRMATIVE, is irrelevant to the calculation.

So if we're considering a motion that requires the affirmative vote of a certain portion of the members present in order to adopt, and the vote is to be counted, the chair should

(1) take the affirmative vote;

(2) count all of the members present;

(3) then take the negative vote; and finally

(4) announce all three counts and the result of the vote, which should then be recorded in the minutes.

Your step #3 is not taken from page 390.

Your step #4 isn't taken from anywhere (i.e., you don't announce the negative vote when the vote threshold is based on "members present").

Per page 390, (a.) you don't take the negative vote; (b.) you don't announce the negative vote.

The negative vote quantity is meaningless because it is never used in the calculation.

[Guest ed]

It all depends on the what the 2/3 vote is out of.

Assuming there are 100 members, and 75 of them are present at a meeting, here are the different possiblities:

1) If it is 2/3 of all members, then there must be 67 "yes" votes. Anyone who abstains, or is not present, has the same effect a a "no" vote.

2) If it is a 2/3 majority of votes cast, then an abstention has no effect on the vote. If 60 of those 75 people vote, then 40 will be sufficient as 40 is 2/3 of 60.

3) If the vote is 2/3 of those present, then 50 of those 75 must vote "yes" and an abstention has the same effect as a "no" vote as 2/3 of all those members present must vote "yes."

[Guest ed]

Thanks much!!

[Guest ed]

Question: If someone fails to vote (i.e., does not formally register an abstention), would that have any impact of the 2/3 approval of the entire group.

[hmtcastle]

Question: If someone fails to vote (i.e., does not formally register an abstention), would that have any impact of the 2/3 approval of the entire group.

It will have the same effect as an abstention. In fact, it is an abstention. An abstention is simply a failure to vote (by a member who is present and could vote if he wanted to). One needn't formally register to do so since one isn't doing anything. So there isn't really such a thing as an abstention, it's just the name for what happens when one doesn't vote. It's like Gertrude Stein's description of Oakland: There's no 'there' there.

[Rob Elsman]

Do abstention votes count?

Answer:

The phrase "abstention votes" is an oxymoron, an abstention being a refusal to vote. To abstain means to refrain from voting, and, as a consequence, there can be no such thing as an "abstention vote."

In the usual situation, where either a majority vote or a two-thirds vote is required, abstentions have absolutely no effect on the outcome of the vote since what is required is either a majority or two thirds of the votes cast. On the other hand, if the vote required is a majority or two thirds of the members present, or a majority or two thirds of the entire membership, an abstention will have the same effect as a "no" vote. Even in such a case, however, an abstention is not a vote. [RONR (10th ed.), p. 387, l. 7-13; p. 388, l. 3-6; p. 390, l. 13-24; see also p.66 of RONR In Brief.]

To be precise then, when approval is necessary by two-thirds majority of the group, abstentions are totaled with the "no" votes, correct? Or, since they are not votes, they are not counted, period?

"[T]wo-thirds majority of the group" is nonsense to begin with, so being precise is really impossible.

[Josh Martin]

Because it makes no difference.

A negative vote of zero, or a negative vote of 99, or a negative vote EQUAL TO THE AFFIRMATIVE VOTE, is irrelevant to the calculation, if the calculation is based on "members present".

Likewise for "total membership". - Taking the negative vote tells you nothing about the winning or losing margin.

Thus, it is a waste of time. Thus, it is truly dilatory.

While I agree that the negative vote has no use in determining if the motion is adopted, if the vote is counted, the negative vote should be recorded in the minutes. At the bottom of pg. 454, RONR notes that "When a count has been ordered or the vote is by ballot, the number of votes on each side should be entered;" without mention of any exceptions.

[David A Foulkes]

While I agree that the negative vote has no use in determining if the motion is adopted, if the vote is counted, the negative vote should be recorded in the minutes. At the bottom of pg. 454, RONR notes that "When a count has been ordered or the vote is by ballot, the number of votes on each side should be entered;" without mention of any exceptions.

And only to clarify, unless I have a different printing of the book, Mr. Martin's citation is found on page 453.

[Guest Michele]

How do we know if a 2/3 vote is based on total membership, members present, or members present and voting?

[Joshua Katz]

18 minutes ago, Guest Michele said:

How do we know if a 2/3 vote is based on total membership, members present, or members present and voting?

As a general rule, if it just calls for a 2/3 vote, it is based on members present and voting. Any other threshold would need to be explicitly specified. Sometimes, bylaws use non-standard language that makes it more challenging.

Most motions in RONR that have a 2/3 vote will also pass if a majority of the entire membership votes in the affirmative.

[J. J.]

26 minutes ago, Guest Michele said:

How do we know if a 2/3 vote is based on total membership, members present, or members present and voting?

In the future, please start a new thread. 

[Richard Brown]

Guest Michele, I agree with both Mr. Katz and J.J.  It is the custom in this forum to ask a new question by starting a new thread.... asking a new question... rather than tacking on to a thread that is ten years old. 

But since Mr. Katz has already responded to your question, I agree that unless your bylaws contain SPECIFIC language to the contrary, a two-thirds vote, without any other qualification or condition, means the vote of two thirds of the members present and voting, ignoring blanks and abstentions. The easy way to determine whether you have obtained a two thirds vote is that if there are twice as many yes votes as no votes, you have attained a two-thirds vote. No need to do any complicated math with fractions, percentages, etc.  If there are twice as many yes votes as no votes, that is a two-thirds vote.

Now, if the rule calls for a vote of two thirds of the members present or of the entire membership, that is a different situation.

Edited October 5, 2020 at 01:22 AM by Richard Brown
Typographical correction

[Caryn Ann Harlos]

So is the initial example 2/3 of the entire membership?  It didn't read that way.

[Joshua Katz]

The language is unclear (and it was before my time), but it looks to me like most of the answers assumed it was 2/3 of the entire membership. Presumably, "of the group" was not the exact bylaws language.

[Gary Novosielski]

NUL
 

Edited October 12, 2020 at 02:38 AM by Gary Novosielski