|
not either necessary or desirable. The pur-
pose of this amendment would make the
taking of this poll discretionary in the
hands of the Court of Appeals.
It is my understanding that this is the
rule in Missouri; the plan which we have
adopted here patterns as you all know the
Missouri Plan. It seems to me that the
Committee's recommendations have gone
further than the Missouri plan in this par-
ticular regard. It seems to me that all of
the benefits which the Committee Report
seeks to obtain will be forthcoming if the
poll is made permissive, yet the fears and
apprehensions of some of the people in the
smaller counties will be absolved.
I would urge you therefore to vote for
the amendment.
THE CHAIRMAN: The Chair recog-
nizes Delegate Mudd.
DELEGATE MUDD: Mr. Chairman, as
I indicated before, the greatest concern in
our Committee regarding this proposal as
a means of informing those voters who are
interested as to the views of the lawyer
regarding an incumbent was the idea that
was suggested in the commission draft,
article 5, as permissive.
Our Committee changed the word "may"
to "shall" and now it is proposed that the
word "shall" be eliminated and "may"
substituted.
I feel that the threat of this poll under
whatever rules might be adopted to be
used or not used as the case might occur
is perhaps the biggest argument against
the use of the poll. Therefore I would sug-
gest that this amendment be defeated.
THE CHAIRMAN: Is there any further
discussion? Delegate Bothe.
DELEGATE BOTHE: May I ask a
question to Delegate Mudd?
THE CHAIRMAN: Do you yield to a
question?
DELEGATE MUDD: Yes.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Bothe.
DELEGATE BOTHE : Is there any ques-
tion about the Court of Appeals or rules
committee to order such polls being made
at their discretion should there be no con-
stitutional provision?
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Mudd.
DELEGATE MUDD: I do not think the
Court of Appeals would have that power.
|
THE CHAIRMAN: Is there any further
discussion? Delegate Adkins.
DELEGATE ADKINS: I would say just
one very brief word. This is at best an ex-
periment. It may very well turn out to be
a profitable experiment. If so I have no
doubt that the Court of Appeals would
continue it. If on the other hand it turns
out to be as it could be, a disastrous ex-
periment, there should be an escape from
it; making it permissive allows us that
escape.
It is inconceivable that the rules com-
mittee in the Court of Appeals on the basis
of the constitution would not initially pro-
pose for the poll. If the poll should turn
out to be disastrous or should it turn out
to be a real impediment, I think the Court
would then be in a position to repeal it.
I would urge that this flexibility might
be justified.
THE CHAIRMAN: Is there any further
discussion?
(There was no response.)
Are you ready for the question?
(Call for the question.)
Delegate Macdonald.
DELEGATE MACDONALD: Mr. Chair-
man, I would call the attention of the Com-
mittee that writing for the regulations of
the taking of this poll is exclusively within
the jurisdiction of the Court of Appeals.
In other words, it is exclusively the job
of the judges. I would also ask the Com-
mittee of the Whole to take into account
the fact that according to the evidence
which has been introduced before the Com-
mittee on the Judicial Branch, it has been
the judges who have been most opposed
to this poll.
In answer to the objection from the
people in the smaller counties, the lawyers
in those counties simply refrain from vot-
ing. If this poll is applied on a selective
basis, I submit the public confidence in the
poll will be shattered. We should have a
uniform poll taken in all cases.
THE CHAIRMAN: Is there any further
discussion?
(There was no response.)
Are you ready for the question?
(Call for the question.)
The question arises on the adoption of
Amendment No. 45 to Committee Recom-
|
