|
DELEGATE GRUMBACHER: Mr.
Chairman, members of the Convention, this
little old secret amendment is, I think, of
vital importance to the conduct of legisla-
tive affairs.
The basic principle which I am advo-
cating here is that electors, whether repre-
sentatives or direct voters, should be free
to choose leaders according to conscience,
uninfluenced by considerations of expedi-
ency which are unavoidable in open roll
call meeting. The open roll call is a meet-
ing in which the candidate knows after his
election who was his friend and who was
his foe.
We have already said in section 5.17
that the lawyer-members of the nominating
commission should be elected by secret bal-
lot for the appellate court nominating com-
mission and for the trial courts nominating
commission. In section 5.21, we have said,
the Court of Appeals shall prescribe the
rule for taking a poll by secret ballot of
the lawyers of the area in which the judge
is required to stand for election.
I believe that the legislature no less than
the lawyers, in fact even more so, should
have the right to secret ballot in electing
those who lead them. In fact, the leaders of
the legislature have far more authority over
what happens to a legislator, over every
legislator, than does a judge over every
lawyer in his area.
We thought it was of constitutional mo-
ment .to put this in the judicial article. I
believe it is also of constitutional moment
to put it here.
There is a general rule that if you wish
to elect your leaders, or your bosses, or
whatever you want to call them, freely,
you should do it in secret.
The major change which this would ef-
fect for the benefit of the State would be
that it would make the legislature more
effective, more responsive to its majority,
definitely more responsive to its majority
and, therefore, more responsive to the ma-
jority of the people of our State.
I am ready to answer any questions.
THE CHAIRMAN: Are there any ques-
tions of the sponsor of the amendment?
Delegate Bard.
DELEGATE BARD: I would like to ask
the sponsor of the amendment whether the
party caucus which takes place previous
to the election would not in a sense make
it more just where each party member
stands anywhere.
|
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Grum-
bacher.
DELEGATE GRUMBACHER: It would
if that happened to be by open ballot. I
think this would influence the caucus. How-
ever, I am not at all sure that every mem-
ber of a caucus would vote exactly the
same way when they got on the floor if
they voted by secret ballot.
THE CHAIRMAN: Are there any fur-
ther questions of the sponsor of the amend-
ment?
(There was no response.)
There appear to be none.
Does any delegate desire to speak in op-
position?
Delegate Gallagher.
DELEGATE GALLAGHER: Mr. Chair-
man, and ladies and gentlemen of the Com-
mittee. The Committee on the Legislative
Branch considered this amendment and
while it met with some favor on the part
of some of the members it was rejected by
the Committee. I believe the vote was 13
to 5. Under those circumstances, therefore,
I respectfully oppose the amendment.
THE CHAIRMAN : Is there any further
discussion?
(There was no response.)
Are you ready for the question?
(Call for the question.)
Sound the quorum bell, please, Mr. Clerk.
The question arises on the adoption of
Amendment No. 7.
A vote Aye is a vote in favor of the
amendment. A vote No is a vote against.
Cast your votes.
Have all delegates voted? Does any dele-
gate desire to change his vote?
(There was no response.)
The Clerk will record the vote.
THE CHAIRMAN: There being 55 votes
in the affirmative and 55 in the negative,
the motion fails for a lack of a majority.
Are there any further amendments to
section 3.13?
(There was no response.)
The Chair hears none.
Are there any amendments to section
3.14?
|
