|
very lucrative law practices for uncertain
public service.
This is alleged by the majority and
others, despite all the evidence supplied by
our outstanding Maryland judiciary at the
present, as well as in the past, under our
elective system.
Somehow, fellow delegates, this argument
is never used with respect to governors,
senators, congressmen, legislators, city
councilmen or county commissioners; but
I submit to you that if the Committee of
the Whole and this Convention takes this
bold step backwards we would be return-
ing to an era and to a system that pre-
ceded this century. If we take this step
backwards, I submit to you that a very
serious move will be made by like pro-
ponents, sometime perhaps twenty-five or
fifty years from now with respect to the
office of governor or some other high elec-
tive office, because if the principle is true
that the very best men are not available
because of the election process for judge,
then it seems to me that same argument
could be made with respect to governor.
I am sure that each and every individual
in this room would be shocked and horrified
by such a proposition. It is perfectly natu-
ral, it is perfectly obvious, we do not al-
ways get the very, very, very best man for
high elective office, because he does not
want to run the risk of an election, and
that is the risk that we take, in our re-
publican form of government.
As I understand it, we have before us
another proposal under another article al-
lowing for elected boards of education in
the county.
Now, will this not doom our entire edu-
cation system, because as I understand the
majority theory, qualified persons will not
appear in public at any time, nor will they
submit their qualifications before the elec-
torate.
As I indicated the other day, it is a fact
that in all of the judicial elections for
circuit court judges in our State over the
past twenty-five years or so, only four men
who were originally appointed and who
were seeking their first full elective terms
have been defeated.
I submit to you that in fewer than a half
a dozen other contests was the vote even
close, indicating only token opposition, if
any, in those elections.
We submit that judges need not fear
facing long and costly elections every time
they come up for election for a new term.
|
This is another myth, because in only 50
per cent of the primaries was there a con-
test and in approximately only one-fourth
of the general elections was there a contest.
I ask you to review the actions of the
Committee of the Whole yesterday with re-
spect to nominating commissions and to
take into consideration what we were about
to do today.
Every witness that appeared before our
Committee, the proponents and opponents
alike of this particular nomination and se-
lection and noncompetitive election process,
said that running against a record is tanta-
mount to a lifetime appointment; and you
have heard, I believe, and I am sure that
you will hear again, that you simply can-
not beat somebody with nobody.
Now, although there have been two occa-
sions, I believe, where a judge has been de-
feated by this process, I understand that
these two occasions span twenty-five years,
and cover approximately six or seven states
that have the noncompetitive election.
I do not think that this is an argument
for noncompetitive elections.
Consider that if judges are to be ap-
pointed by a nominating commission, as
this Committee has already indicated, with-
out the benefit of perusal by persons who
have to answer to the people, then should
we not seriously consider whether or not
we are establishing a system by way of
these noncompetitive elections that future
generations will be rebuked as the dele-
gates to the 1851 Maryland Constitutional
Convention were.
I submit that if we did not have nomi-
nating commissions, and if an elected rep-
resentative of the people would have had
final say, full and final say, I doubt very
much if this amendment would be offered,
although I would probably support it.
I can appreciate the great concern that
many members of this body have concern-
ing election of judges, and I am very sym-
pathetic to those rare occasions when either
a candidate for the office of judge, or as I
understand it, although I have never seen
it, a judge goes beyond the bounds of pro-
priety and acts in a way that is not be-
coming to the office of judge.
THE CHAIRMAN: You have one min-
ute, Delegate Johnson.
DELEGATE JOHNSON: This is a fact,
but would we destroy all of the flowers in
Maryland because a large number of people
suffer with hay fever? Would we close down
|
