|Posted on Tuesday, December 30, 2003 - 03:08 pm: |
Mahesh Raj Mohan
|Posted on Tuesday, December 30, 2003 - 03:29 pm: |
|Posted on Tuesday, December 30, 2003 - 04:23 pm: |
|Posted on Wednesday, December 31, 2003 - 12:00 am: |
|Posted on Monday, January 05, 2004 - 05:35 am: |
Can someone explain a quote from the article to a non-US reader, please:
"The Senate passed it with a voice vote to avoid individual accountability"
The only sense I can make of that is one which I really, really don't wish to make. Can someone explain what it means and hopefully prove me wrong?
It reads as if they were prepared to vote in into existence but not be prepared for their vote - whichever way - to be a public record. Please tell me I've got this wrong.
|Posted on Monday, January 05, 2004 - 10:45 am: |
You've got it right, Iain.
|Posted on Monday, January 05, 2004 - 06:21 pm: |
But don't voice votes get recorded someplace --the Congressional record? where they are public?
|Posted on Tuesday, January 06, 2004 - 03:59 am: |
I was intrigued enough to do a bit of digging around, and found this on the Senate website:
"voice vote - A vote in which the Presiding Officer states the question, then asks those in favor and against to say "Yea" or "Nay," respectively, and announces the result according to his or her judgment. The names or numbers of Senators voting on each side are not recorded."
Perhaps I am insufficiently cynical, but I am gobsmacked at this. I don't want to get into the rights and wrongs of the bit of legislation passed (although I have very definite views on it), but to pass *anything* that is of such great importance in a way in which the electorate are denied the opportunity to know how the person they put on the gravy- um, elected - voted is just so, so wrong.
Cowards. Absolute cowards.
|Posted on Tuesday, January 06, 2004 - 12:44 pm: |
Please vote accourdingly...