|
citizens of the State of Maryland. Whether
we should include this in the constitution
or not I think is a question that each of us
is struggling with. I have struggled with
this question myself. We talk about what is
in the present Constitution, that from a
historical perspective has no meaning for
us.
I say let's not try to write a constitution
that will last a hundred years. Let's write
it for now. If we have to do it again in
twenty-five years, let's do so. I think our
constitution should reflect problems we live
with today. We cannot predict what will
happen a hundred years from now. If ex-
ploitation is one thing we are living with,
then let's try to deal with it in our consti-
tution; otherwise we will come up with
what I think is a very sterile constitution
and it will have no meaning, no being, no
essence.
We are going to have to try to persuade
the voters to vote for this constitution in
May. We should not have a sterile docu-
ment. We will have to drag the voters out
to the polls to vote for or against it. If
they do not understand what we have done
here, and they cannot feel we have at-
tempted at least to look out for their inter-
ests through the constitution, then I would
say forget it. You are only building a con-
stitution that will fall into the hands of
legal mumbo-jumbo and have no meaning
to the average person. I say let's put a
little heart in this constitution. Let's write
it for a brief period but let's write it so it
will have some effect on the people who
live in this State.
THE CHAIRMAN: Does any other dele-
gate desire to speak in opposition?
Delegate Winslow?
DELEGATE WINSLOW: Mr. Chair-
man, fellow delegates, I, too, am a customer.
I suspect that as of today I have been a
consumer longer than anyone else in this
room. Moreover, I have had some interest
in the protection of the unprotected con-
sumer from unfair business practices, or
unfair other kinds of practices, but I should
like to say two things with respect to this
measure : One, in answer to the gentleman's
question a few moments ago, how do you
determine what things are of a constitu-
tional nature, I suggest this is rather
simple. The purpose of a constitution is to
allocate power, not to exercise it, and if we
start allocating power in the constitution
when the power is already there, we run,
unfortunately, into a difficult situation of
interpretation. It has long been the prac-
tice of the courts of this country to inter-
|
pret the constitution in such a way that
when a power is expressed, the courts in-
terpret that as being the limits. I can see
it possible for the courts to take the word-
ing of this provision as now stated and say
that it was intended by the Convention that
the only protection which the constitution
demands of the legislature in this respect
is with respect to the words themselves
against harmful and unfair business prac-
tices, not other kinds of practices, only
business practices.
This is going to give the courts some
difficulty, and it has already been suggested
that there is some question as to whether
this includes professional practices.
It seems to me that we are on very dan-
gerous ground here if we attempt to do
something which may turn out by inter-
pretation of the courts to be something that
we did not want.
It may very well be that the passage of
this particular provision will unfortunately
leave the consumers in a worse position
than that which they now occupy.
It seems to me perfectly reasonable to
leave this matter of consumer protection
along with other kinds of protection where
it belongs, which is to say in General As-
sembly.
THE CHAIRMAN: Does any other dele-
gate desire to speak in favor of the pro-
posal?
Does any other delegate desire to speak
against?
Delegate Beatrice Miller.
DELEGATE B. MILLER: I would like
to speak in favor of this proposal. Since
1930 the federal government has adopted
its responsibility in the realm of economic
services and security, in addition to the
political area, and we have seen much evi-
dence of consumer legislation on the fed-
eral level.
In 1962, President Kennedy sent to the
Congress a message proposing a bill of
rights for the consumer including the right
to safety, the right to be informed, the
right to choose, the right to be heard.
No one can deny that property rights
have always been constitutionally pro-
tected. I would point out also that there is
consumer protection in our present Con-
stitution. The 1867 Constitution provides
for the regulation of banks, for eminent
domain, for the regulation of corporations,
for the establishment of a legal right of
|
