|
If it is then approved, the Committee of
the Whole will have directed that there be
a provision in the constitution with respect
to the Board of Public Works. It would not
have directed the precise terms or language.
An amendment to Committee Recommen-
dation EB-1 stating such terms and lan-
guage would, of course, be in order at the
time of consideration of Committee Rec-
ommendation EB-1, because it would not
be inconsistent with the final action on the
Committee Report.
On the other hand, if the amendment to
the Committee Report should fail, and
thereafter the Committee Report recom-
mending that there not be a revision in the
constitution with respect to the Board of
Public Works should be approved, and
thereafter the Committee of the Whole
should rise other than for meal recess and
report that recommendation to the Conven-
tion, then it would not be in order there-
after on consideration of Committee Rec-
ommendation EB-1 to consider an amend-
ment to that recommendation providing
for a Board, because that would be incon-
sistent with the action of the Committee of
the Whole.
Delegate Schneider.
DELEGATE SCHNEIDER: May I make
a further parliamentary inquiry?
THE CHAIRMAN: Yes.
DELEGATE SCHNEIDER: Suppose we
did adopt the amendment and that we
manifested our intent that there should be
a Board of Public Works in the constitu-
tion, and then we started amending. Sup-
pose at that particular time some of the
members decided that there should not be
and the majority says there should be. How,
then, would we ever get out of the dilemma
of considering amendments and infinitum
when they are all defeated because the ma-
jority does not want a Board of Public
Works?
THE CHAIRMAN: I would assume if
the recommendation was not implemented
at some point it could not be carried into
effect, and it could only be implemented by
adoption of EB-1, which would carry it into
effect.
I further say that the Convention has
complete power to disregard any recom-
mendation of the Committee of the Whole.
For what purpose does Delegate Pullen
rise?
DELEGATE PULLEN: Inquiry.
|
I have just gotten in. I want to vote to
retain the Board of Public Works. How do
I vote on this next proposal?
THE CHAIRMAN: Do you desire to re-
tain it in the constitution or as a statutory
board?
DELEGATE PULLEN: In the constitu-
tion.
THE CHAIRMAN: You would vote in
favor of the amendment, and if it were
adopted, you would vote in favor of the
Committee Report as amended.
DELEGATE PULLEN: Thank you.
THE CHAIRMAN: Is there any further
inquiry as to this rather confused parlia-
mentary matter?
(There was no response.)
If not, the Clerk will ring the quorum
bell.
The amendment before you is the amend-
ment to delete the word "not" in line 14
of Committee Report EB-1. A vote Aye is
a vote in favor of that amendment, and
would result in the deletion of that word
from the Committee Report, that is, from
Recommendation No. 1 of the Committee
Report, and would then be recommending
that the Board of Public Works be pro-
vided for in the constitution.
A vote No is a vote against the proposed
amendment. If the amendment failed, it
would be the Committee Recommendation
as it is printed in Report EB-1, that the
Board of Public Works not be provided for
in the constitution. That Recommendation
would then be submitted to another vote.
The question now arises on the adoption
of the amendment. A vote Aye is a vote in
favor of the amendment, and deletes the
word "not."
A vote No is a vote against the amend-
ment.
Cast your votes.
Has every delegate voted? Does any dele-
gate desire to change his vote?
(There was no response.)
The Clerk will record the vote.
There being 68 votes in the affirmative
and 66 in the negative, the motion carries.
The amendment to Committee Recommen-
dation EB-1 is now adopted.
The question now arises on the adoption
of the Committee Recommendation as
|
