|
DELEGATE MALKUS: I would like to
have clarifications of several statements
that the gentleman made before I vote on
the subject matter.
Now, if we cannot have them, is it in
order that he re-read some of the state-
ments that he made, then possibly we could
go ahead and questions him on the sub-
ject matter as he re-reads them?
THE CHAIRMAN: The Chair rules that
is not in order. Do you have a further
question?
DELEGATE MALKUS: Mr. President,
there is no sense in my asking any fur-
ther questions because, as I said many
times before, this is a stacked deck.
THE CHAIRMAN: Are there any fur-
ther questions of the Vice-Chairman for
purposes of clarification? Delegate Dorsey.
DELEGATE DORSEY: Judge Adkins,
is it not true that when this government
was formed, there were two schools of
thought: One advocated by Hamilton, that
there should be a government far removed
from the people, and another advocated by
Jefferson that the power of government
should be diffused among the masses; and
was not the Jeffersonian theory adopted?
DELEGATE ADKINS: I would sug-
gest to you, sir, that there have always
been two schools of thought on practically
every political issue, including this one. I
would also suggest that perhaps the Hamil-
tonian theory was adopted insofar as the
Constitution of the United States was
concerned.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Dorsey.
DELEGATE DORSEY: Was it not the
Hamiltonian theory that there should be a
dictator form of government, and Jefferson
believed in a democracy of men, with the
power of government diffused among the
masses?
DELEGATE ADKINS: I would suggest
the use of the term "dictatorship" is com-
pletely out of order. Any elected govern-
ment is responsive to the people where its
elected officials periodically report to and
receive the ratification of those people.
DELEGATE DORSEY: Did Hamilton
not advocate an aristocracy of wealth?
DELEGATE ADKINS: I am not aware
of that. The Federalist papers to which I
refer, do not discuss that problem.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Dorsey.
|
DELEGATE DORSEY: It would not
hurt a bit if you read a little bit about
Jefferson.
DELEGATE ADKINS: I will be happy
for you to do so when your turn comes.
THE CHAIRMAN: Are there any fur-
ther questions of the Vice-Chairman? Dele-
gate Frederick.
DELEGATE FREDERICK: I have a
simple question.
DELEGATE ADKINS: No question is
simple.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Frederick.
DELEGATE FREDERICK: If the con-
stitution is silent on this point of con-
troller, could the General Assembly estab-
lish such an office?
DELEGATE ADKINS: I should say if
the constitution is silent, the General As-
sembly could establish an elected comp-
troller who, however, would not be the head
of a principle department, and under the
terms of the Committee's later recommen-
dations, would not be the chief fiscal offi-
cer of the State. They could, however, pro-
vide, as I understand it, for an elected
comptroller having such powers short of
that as they saw fit to give to him.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Frederick.
DELEGATE FREDERICK: If they do
provide such an officer, could the governor
veto such a statute?
DELEGATE ADKINS: It would have to
be provided by law. It would be subject to
gubernatorial veto. It could be passed over
his veto by the requisite constitutional
majority.
DELEGATE FREDERICK: Then it is
possible you would need two-thirds vote
rather than simple majority to establish
control of any sort?
DELEGATE ADKINS: I have forgot-
ten whether it is two-thirds or three-fifths.
In any event, they would need that, as-
suming the governor was disposed to veto
the legislature, yes.
THE CHAIRMAN: Are there any fur-
ther questions of the Vice-Chairman? Dele-
gate Chabot.
DELEGATE CHABOT: Judge Adkins,
if we were to agree with the committee
report on this point but disagree with the
committee report on item 1, the Board of
Public Works, in what way would this re-
|
