|
we felt that since this was a Constitutional
Convention, that we ought not approach it
in that way, and we arrived at the best
bi-partisan commission composition we
could contemplate.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Byrnes.
DELEGATE BYRNES: Is there not a
possibility of a neutral chairman?
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Gallagher.
DELEGATE GALLAGHER: Yes, if you
bring him in from Mars, but I cannot see
him coming from any other place.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Byrnes.
DELEGATE BYRNES: I might suggest
for example political science professors.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Gallagher.
DELEGATE GALLAGHER: They are
the most partisan creatures I have ever
met.
THE CHAIRMAN: Any further ques-
tions, Delegate Byrnes?
DELEGATE BYRNES: Delegate Bam-
berger suggested the President of the
Junior College of Baltimore.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Gallagher.
DELEGATE GALLAGHER: He is the
most partisan creature I have ever met.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Byrnes.
DELEGATE BYRNES: A second ques-
tion, Delegate Gallagher. On page 1, sec-
tion 1, the section referring to the re-
quirement that the natural boundaries be
followed, et cetera, would this not prove to
be immensely difficult in the future because
would not at least 80 percent of the popu-
lation be in approximately seven counties?
Would this not be extremely difficult to
follow?
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Gallagher.
DELEGATE GALLAGHER: You are
suggesting it would be difficult in the large
urban areas. The principal difficulty will
be there, but on the other hand, the vast
land area of the State is elsewhere and it
certainly ought to be an easier job to fol-
low the subdivision lines and the natural
geographical boundaries.
I do not envisage, for example, in Balti-
more City that they will say that every-
body from the first to the tenth floor of the
apartment house will be in District A and
those on the eleventh to twentieth will be
in District B.
|
New York's Constitution had a provision
that you could not split a block in drawing
lines, but we did not feel we had to go into
that detail.
THE CHAIRMAN: Are there any fur-
ther questions, Delegate Byrnes?
DELEGATE BYRNES: I have this one
final question, sir.
Some people are concerned, as you know,
about the possible consequences of single
member districts being a parochial influ-
ence, and we recognize that we have now
given home rule to the counties; we also
recognize that at least in the House of
Delegates we will have at worst parochial
single member district interests, and at
best perhaps county-wide interests, but no-
where in the entire Constitution do we find
a formula which will encourage a metro-
politan or regional perspective.
I am suggesting the possibility that at
least one house might be so oriented, and I
submitted that idea to you many weeks ago
in a suggested amendment. I was curious
whether or not your Committee had the op-
portunity to review that and what your
own opinion was.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Gallagher.
DELEGATE GALLAGHER: You of-
fered an amendment, which I asked you to
hold until we came to this, because that
was contrary to what I knew the Commit-
tee wanted. The Committee did not adopt
it, but if you will offer it I am sure we will
have an opportunity for debate.
I would hope that those areas that do
find good reason for the formation of
regional governments, would not find this
particular guideline an obstacle, and I do
not think that they should.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Clagett.
DELEGATE CLAGETT: Delegate Gal-
lagher, with respect to section 3.16 I want
to be sure I understand really in terms of
arithmetic the effect of what the Commit-
tee has provided there.
In order to suspend and have action by
one house after action by the other house,
as I understand it, your requirement here
is only that there be a three-fifths vote of
the members present and voting, a quorum
being presented?
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Gallagher.
DELEGATE GALLAGHER: Yes, sir.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Clagett.
|
