I’d say fence-sitting this vote is even more an indictment than just a “No” vote personally; it doesn’t take a MENSA candidate to tell whether or not funding a genocidal morass of settlers is morally correct
Expect that “something” added to be a thing that makes the bill a non-starter. Something like ‘no assistance to Ukraine’ or ‘passport required to vote’ or ‘federal abortion pill ban’, etc.
Another example of more subtle forms of exclusion afforded by anonymity can be found in the
practice of voice vote in the US Congress. While the roll call voting record, which identifies
the voting behavior of each Congress member individually, has established itself as the
dominant practice in modern congressional procedures, the default version still practiced today
is the voice vote. Here yeas and nays are each expressed verbally and collectively so that the
individual vote of the respective Congress member remains unknown to the public. The chair
then gauges the majority and decides the vote. This procedure, which is the original practice of
the US Congress, undermines transparency and parliamentary accountability. Obscuring voting
behavior effectively shuts the public out and metaphorically speaking closes the doors of
parliament to public scrutiny. Lynch and Madonna (2103) find that elections incentivize
Congress members to request a recorded roll call vote. Thus, while the competition for seats
enhances transparency, voice voting is still a common practice when members of Congress
want to conceal their voting behavior on controversial issues
I like this because then we can see who votes against it and know definitively who does and does not support this ongoing genocide
I hope you’re prepared for a lot of “abstain” votes.
Abstaining is pro genocide imo
That is a perfectly clear message for me actually.
It’s about opposing genocide or not. “Do nothing knowing that will cause the genocide to continue” is close enough to “continue the genocide” for me.
I’d say fence-sitting this vote is even more an indictment than just a “No” vote personally; it doesn’t take a MENSA candidate to tell whether or not funding a genocidal morass of settlers is morally correct
Yeah, saying ‘no comment’ to stopping a thing we’re already doing is just adding a meaningless word after the ‘no’
Still tells me everything I need to know. Silence is violence
Thats a bit dramatic, its more like silence is complacency in congress
Someone will add something to the bill that will give any who need it an excuse to vote against.
and any who take it can be safely counted as monsters in support of a genocide, fuck what they say after the fact
Expect that “something” added to be a thing that makes the bill a non-starter. Something like ‘no assistance to Ukraine’ or ‘passport required to vote’ or ‘federal abortion pill ban’, etc.
Assuming they don’t do a voice vote (PDF).