|
DELEGATE MARION: Delegate Byrnes,
would it help your answer to that question
to know that State's Attorney Moylan did
favor cross filing and non-party designa-
tions when he testified before the Judicial
Branch Committee of this Convention?
THE CHAIRMAN: That is hardly a
question.
DELEGATE BYRNES: I would answer
the question by saying yes.
THE CHAIRMAN: Any delegate desire
to speak in opposition to the amendment?
Delegate Morgan.
DELEGATE MORGAN: Mr. Chairman,
Delegate Byrnes is correct in saying that
the Committee had originally determined
to put the cross filing and running without
party designation for state's attorneys in
the schedule of legislation, but it was ruled
that that was inappropriate or not au-
thorized in the schedule under the law
which created the Convention.
But -the Executive Branch Committee
never thought of putting this requirement
of cross filing in the constitution. We de-
termined to put it in the schedule of legis-
lation so that the legislature could operate
on it and so that necessary flexibility in
this field would be maintained.
If we had decided that it should be put
in the constitution, we would have done so,
and the reason we did not was because we
thought the whole business about the state's
attorneys, except the fact that they should
be popularly elected, should be left to the
General Assembly, and this would freeze
one particular aspect of the state's at-
torneys, and it would be contrary to the de-
sires of the Executive Branch Committee.
THE CHAIRMAN: Any other delegate
desire to speak in favor of the amendment?
Delegate Boileau.
DELEGATE BOILEAU: Yes, I do, Mr.
Chairman.
I hate to disagree with the Chairman of
my Committee but I do remember there
being two sections offered and language
for us to vote on; the second one which
did not receive the majority did include a
line or two in it that made reference to
cross filing and was substantially the same
as the amendment offered by Delegate
Byrnes.
I might note that the Committee, as
Delegate Byrnes so ably pointed out, did
|
think enough of this office to include it as
a constitutional office. There was a great
deal of testimony in the Committee about
the need to remove it from politics.
I myself intended to vote for the second
provision in the Committee. It never did
come up for a vote because of the fact
that the first section received the majority.
I do indeed intend to vote for Delegate
Byrnes' amendment at this time; I think
it is a very good way to remove this all-
important office from the arena of partisan
politics. Politics is not barred, but it does
not belong in our court system if we can
possibly remove it. This is definitely an
office within the court system under a
quasi-judicial label.
THE CHAIRMAN: Any delegate desire
to speak in opposition to the amendment?
Delegate Hanson?
DELEGATE HANSON: Mr. Chairman,
I am sorry to oppose this amendment be-
cause it has the aura of apple pie and al-
most motherhood surrounding it. It sug-
gests the interesting proposition on the one
hand that we can take the state's attorneys
out of politics by making them elected,
and on the other hand, realizing a certain
amount of inconsistency in that proposition,
suggests that we can sanitize the whole
process by making them non-partisan or
cross file officials.
For my part I want the state's attorney
in my county to run on a party ticket and
I think I would like to see the state's at-
torneys in the State running on a party
ticket because I think law enforcement is
one of the most important political and
governmental issues that faces this country,
faces this State, and faces any community
in this State. I believe that the political
parties which are the means by which we
develop governmental programs, and pur-
sue those programs, should have to stand
accountable in this State for the ability
that they have to recruit effective prose-
cuting officers and to enforce the law effec-
tively.
I believe, therefore, that it is a great
advantage to have the prosecuting attorney,
if he is to be elected, running on a party
ticket, and standing with the officials of
local government in the counties, to state
on a unified platform their attempt to do
something about the crime problem in those
counties.
I think it is useful state-wide to have the
state's attorneys running on the same
|
