|
Now, as to the status of the matter un-
der consideration: There was no request
for verification of the vote prior to the time
another vote was ordered. Quite obviously,
if a delegate observing his vote recorded
on the electronic roll call vote takes the
floor and says that the machine has im-
properly recorded his vote, the record can
be corrected. I think the record can be cor-
rected at any time upon a proper request
therefore by a delegate who says his vote
is improperly recorded.
In addition to that, in this particular
situation, the motion to reconsider the vote
was before the house and was pending, and
I do not think it could be delayed by a
verification of a prior vote. However, such
a verification would serve no useful pur-
pose because the vote by which the motion
to reconsider the earlier vote would ac-
complish everything that could possibly be
accomplished by any verification under the
procedures laid down by the Rules of this
Convention.
As the matter under consideration is
somewhat confused, I think the Chair
should state again, so that there will be no
misconceptions at all as to the status of
the matter. Regardless of the outcomes on
the vote, you have a Committee Report,
not a Committee Recommendation. There
is a difference under the Rules. The Report
is a report as to what shall not be in the
constitution, as distinguished from one as
to what shall be in the constitution.
If the Report recommends that something
not be in the constitution, and it is ap-
proved so that the Committee of the Whole
has affirmatively decided that a certain
matter shall not be in the constitution, I
think it would not be in order at a subse-
quent sitting of the Committee of the
Whole on consideration of the Committee
Recommendation for the executive branch
to consider an amendment to that article,
which would be contrary to the action taken
by the Committee of the Whole in ap-
proving a Report as to what should not be
in the constitution.
On the other hand, if the Report was in-
conclusive, as it was on a tie vote, it means
that you had no recommendation whatso-
ever. In that situation, quite obviously, an
amendment to include a provision in the
constitution with respect to the Board of
Public Works at the time the Committee
Recommendation was under consideration,
would obviously be in order.
Similarly, if the action of the Committee
of the Whole was to approve a Recommen-
|
dation that the constitution contain a pro-
vision with respect to the Board of Public
Works, such an amendment would be in
order to be considered, but since there is
no way by which the Committee of the
Whole can enforce its ruling with respect
to such a Recommendation, namely, that
the constitution contain a provision, the net
effect of these latter two recommendations
would be about the same. In other words,
if the Committee approved a Recommenda-
tion that the Constitution contain a provi-
sion for the Board of Public Works, or if
the Committee of the Whole failed either to
approve or disapprove such a Recommen-
dation, the net effect would be the same:
namely, an amendment to put a Board of
Public Works in the constitution would be
in order in either event, so that you would
have, of the three possible actions on Com-
mittee Recommendation No. 1, only the
first action; that is, an approval of a re-
port that the constitution not contain a pro-
vision with respect to the Board of Public
Works. Only that action would prevent
consideration of such a matter as an
amendment of the Committee Recommenda-
tion.
Is there any question as to the effect of
the amendment? Delegate Schneider.
DELEGATE SCHNEIDER: Mr. Chair-
man, may I ask a question with respect to
the motion that is now on the floor, which
will go to the matter of what you have
just been discussing?
THE PRESIDENT: State the question?
DELEGATE SCHNEIDER: If we were
to defeat the motion of the Committee on
Calendar and Agenda, to postpone consid-
eration of the motion to reconsider, then
considered the motion to reconsider and
defeated that motion, would we not have
in effect a postponement of consideration
of the matter of whether the Board of
Public Works should or should not be in
the constitution in the sense that we would
defer consideration of that until the Com-
mittee Recommendation which is the blue
sheet, comes on the floor and then the pro-
ponents of the Board of Public Works
could offer their amendments there.
THE PRESIDENT: That would be the
effect of it, I think.
Is there any further question? Delegate
Wheatley?
DELEGATE WHEATLEY: Mr. Chair-
man, a further parliamentary inquiry to
your recent statement. It is rather unusual,
I think, that we are taking this by Report
|
