>The reason these kinds of statements are empty platitudes is because people like Singer aren't saying individuals should be
>
>required
>
>to alleviate the world's poverty, through enforceable laws or policies, but rather they should
>
>choose
>
>to alleviate the world's poverty, freely, which of course many won't do

Lawmakers are people too.

Acts to vote for new laws are acts just like following those laws are acts and like doing charity despite the absence of such laws are acts as well.

Rule utilitarianism is the default unless explicitly stated otherwise. Because you would need to justify why of all possible actions, those who consist of establishing rules should be set out of scope. They are just actions that need to be assessed by their expected consequences, like all other actions.