|
nificance as the duty or power or authority
to sign or veto bills.
THE CHAIRMAN: It would not go to
the question the Chair propounded but
would go to your amendment, and perhaps
we should confine the discussion to that
for the moment.
Would you think that Delegate Sickles'
suggestion would accomplish the purpose
of your amendment? Did you follow his
suggestion as to where the language would
go?
DELEGATE CHABOT: Yes. I think
that it largely would. I think that, however,
it would create its own ties with that sec-
tion, which by and large I agree with. I
think that it would make it possible for
the legislature to immobilize the lieutenant
governor, although the purpose of the Com-
mittee was that the governor have the de-
cision as to the extent to which the lieu-
tenant governor can function in the State,
and so I would not agree to Delegate
Sickles' proposal as an acceptable alternate.
THE CHAIRMAN: Very well.
Delegate Weidemeyer.
DELEGATE WEIDEMEYER: Mr.
Chairman, I would like to ask Delegate
Chabot, and I may have to state my con-
clusion in asking the question, but under
section 4. 14, "Veto by the governor", we
find that all bills passed by the General As-
sembly shall be subject to veto by the gov-
ernor.
Now, there is not a duty; it is a clear
power given the governor and no one else
other than the governor or the acting gov-
ernor, which under other provisions, the
acting governor would take over. An ex-
pressed power, an extraordinary power, ex-
pressly given to the governor or the act-
ing governor is a vastly different thing
from a duty prescribed by law, and I would
think that if the legislature attempted to
give anyone else the power of veto over
bills as an extraordinary power, in view of
section 4. 14, such delegation by the legis-
lature would be clearly unconstitutional.
My question is, can you not agree with that
conclusion?
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Chabot.
DELEGATE CHABOT: I cannot agree
with that conclusion. I would like to be
able to agree with that conclusion, but I
think the questions I had asked of the
Committee Chairman yesterday, and Dele-
gate Marion's colloquy with the Committee
Chairman today, has foreclosed that matter.
|
It has been established that the Committee
that presented it through its Chairman and
through its memorandum specifically has
included the veto as a duty. Whatever dif-
ference there may be between duties and
powers, and consequently, much as I would
like to, I cannot agree that this body is in
a position to accept your interpretation of
that possibility.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Weide-
meyer.
DELEGATE WEIDEMEYER: Is it true
that an exercise of the power might be dis-
cretionary with the governor, where the
exercise of a duty is almost mandatory,
where the duty is prescribed by the consti-
tution or by the legislative enactment. It
becomes mandatory upon the governor or
the acting governor to perform whereas a
power is something that is discretionary
with him as to whether or not he might
want to exercise it.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Chabot.
DELEGATE CHABOT: I really think
that if that is a question, it is a question
to be answered by the Committee Chair-
man. As I said, I would like to be able to
read that interpretation into these words.
I think that this body has been foreclosed
from reading that interpretation into it.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Clagett.
DELEGATE CLAGETT: Mr. Chairman,
I have a question I would like to ask the
Chairman of the Committee, Delegate Mor-
gan. Where the provision is made in sec-
tion 4. 03, that the lieutenant governor shall
perform such duties as may be prescribed
by law, is it not the intent of the Commit-
tee and the meaning of the language that
the legislature can only delegate to the
lieutenant governor by law such duties as
it may have the power under this consti-
tution to delegate to him, which means that
it could not delegate to him the powers
granted to the executive under 4. 01, but
could only delegate to him such powers as
it had under 3. 01, or otherwise, there would
be a violation of the difference between the
branches of government.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Morgan.
DELEGATE MORGAN: I think that
generally is a correct interpretation. For
example, the General Assembly might ask
the lieutenant governor to be a member of
some board, or it might ask the lieutenant
governor to participate in the administra-
tion of some particular program. Now, cer-
tainly the General Assembly would also
|
