|
judgeship, that a legislator would not be
eligible during his term of office to be ap-
pointed to that judgeship; is that correct,
Chairman Gallagher?
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Gallagher.
DELEGATE GALLAGHER: Yes, that
was always the practice under the old
Constitution, except where they created a
new judgeship by constitutional amend-
ment, and said that the old prohibition did
not apply, and then the state senator be-
came a judge.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Grant.
DELEGATE GRANT: Now, the second
question is, since in the matter of judge-
ships they are prescribed to be on a uni-
form salary scale, if the judgeship was uni-
formly increased in compensation during
the period of time that the legislature was,
would he not be eligible once again?
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Gallagher.
DELEGATE GALLAGHER: That would
be my understanding.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Grant.
DELEGATE GRANT: In regard to the
position such as commissioners and clerks,
which are created by rule, and the appoint-
ment is as prescribed by rule and tenure
of duty, et cetera, would not the very fact
that the General Assembly passed an ap-
propriation act make the legislator in-
eligible?
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Gallagher.
DELEGATE GALLAGHER: I think it
would. I think if the legislature were re-
sponsible for increasing the compensation
for that office, even by passing the general
appropriations bill, that no member of the
General Assembly who voted for the in-
crease could fill the office during the term
for which he had been elected to the Gen-
eral Assembly.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Grant.
DELEGATE GRANT: You would hold
that interpretation, even though the actual
pay scale is to be established by rule and
not by law? In other words, when you refer
to the General Assembly, you mean the
General Assembly acting by law, or do
you mean General Assembly, providing
general support, with the specific pay
matter being established by rule?
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Gallagher?
DELEGATE GALLAGHER: I think this
has to be construed in a broad manner and
|
I think if any member of the General As-
sembly were a party in some way, as a
member of the General Assembly, in in-
creasing the compensation for an office
that he then could not fill it during the
term for which he was elected.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Grant.
DELEGATE GRANT: By virtue of the
passage of the general appropriations bill?
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Gallagher.
DELEGATE GALLAGHER: Yes.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Gallagher,
in response to one of the earlier questions
of Delegate Grant, you said, provided the
member of the General Assembly voted on
the matter.
I take it that that was an inadvertent
slip?
DELEGATE GALLAGHER: Yes, sir.
As long as he is a member of the General
Assembly regardless of whether he voted.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Gleason.
DELEGATE GLEASON: Mr. Chairman,
our Chairman has done his usual lucid,
precise job in explaining the Committee's
action in connection with the Recommenda-
tion No. 2 of the Committee on the Legis-
lative Branch.
There was however, one colloquy, I think,
and I do not know where it fits into this
recommendation, but I would hate to have
it lie without our shoring up our position a
little bit.
It was with respect to Delegate Storm's
questions on single member districts. As I
recall it the discussion went somewhat
along the lines that one of the purposes of
this was to shore up minority representa-
tion in the State of Maryland.
Am I correct, as I believe I am, that in
the discussion of this provision in the
Committee there is absolutely no discussion
on minority representation relating to
single member districts, but rather the
discussion was that this was the effective
way for individuals and people living in a
district to know who their representative
was in the House of Delegates and be able
to get at him when the situation required.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Gallagher.
DELEGATE GALLAGHER: Delegate
Gleason is correct. The discussion went
along those lines. I do not think though
that we could have failed to observe that
a minority party, be it a 49-51 percent or
|
