|
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Gleason.
DELEGATE GLEASON: Yes, I would
not change that sentence and would leave
it the way it is. I think that has already
been approved once by the Committee of
the Whole itself. I would not change that.
THE CHAIRMAN: Do you have a fur-
ther question, Delegate Chabot?
DELEGATE CHABOT: Yes, sir. To
whom do you understand the word "nomi-
nees" in line 46 to refer if your amend-
ment is adopted?
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Gleason.
DELEGATE GLEASON: Let me say
the delegate is correct. There will have to
be one technical amendment in that section :
the words "one of the nominees" would
have to be eliminated ; so you would have
to appoint within 60 days after receiving
the list. That is the part of the sentence
that will remain intact if this amendment
is approved.
THE CHAIRMAN: Is there any objec-
tion to considering Delegate Gleason's
amendment modified so that in addition to
the change noted, it eliminates from line
46 the words "one of the nominees"? Is
there any objection? Is the modification ac-
cepted by the seconder? Is there any fur-
ther discussion? Delegate Marion.
DELEGATE MARION: I address a
question to Delegate Gleason.
THE CHAIRMAN: Will Delegate Glea-
son yield to a question?
DELEGATE GLEASON: I yield.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Marion.
DELEGATE MARION: Further along
that line, might I inquire what your in-
tent would be if the governor were to make
an appointment, but the Senate were to
refuse to advise and consent? Does that
end the governor's power to make the ap-
pointment and thereby confer it upon the
judge, or does that sentence not become
operative if the name has been submitted
to the Senate but the Senate has failed to
act.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Gleason.
DELEGATE GLEASON: May I say to
the delegate that I assume the governor
will respond with his nominee shortly
after receiving the list. After the Senate
has had an opportunity to review the selec-
tion and they advise the governor that
they will not consent to the nominee, he is
|
perfectly able and authorized to send up
another nominee.
THE CHAIRMAN: Ready for the ques-
tion? Delegate Gleason, the Chair would
like to vote that you eliminate in line 46
the words "one of the nominees", but you
do not eliminate those same words in lines
49 and 50. The Chair takes it you intend
to leave them in with the effect that if the
governor fails to appoint within sixty days
the chief judge shall appoint one of the
nominees. Is this correct?
DELEGATE GLEASON: That is cor-
rect, sir.
THE CHAIRMAN: Are you ready for
the question?
(Call for the question.)
The Clerk will ring the quorum bell. The
question arises on the adoption of Amend-
ment No. 33 as modified.
A vote Aye is a vote in favor of the
amendment as modified. A vote No is a
vote against. Cast your vote. Have all dele-
gates voted.
(There was no response.)
Does any delegate desire to change his
vote?
(There was no response.)
The Clerk will record the vote. There
being 39 votes in the affirmative and 78 in
the negative, the motion is lost. The amend-
ment is rejected.
There are no other amendments of which
the Chair has knowledge with respect to
section 5.14. The Chair would be disposed
at this time to call on Delegate Powers to
make a motion that the Committee of the
Whole rise. For what purpose does Dele-
gate Malkus rise?
DELEGATE MALKUS: Mr. Chairman,
I rise upon a point of inquiry. If we rise,
as you call it, we will then be finished with
section 5.14, is that correct?
THE CHAIRMAN: And 5.15. We will
resume consideration beginning with sec-
tion 5.16.
DELEGATE MALKUS: My second
question is would this in any way curtail
any amendments we might have as to how
these so-called commissions and committees
operate?
THE CHAIRMAN: The Chair cannot
possibly answer that question without
knowing what .the amendments are. I would
|
