|
THE PRESIDENT: Seconded?
(The motion was duly seconded.)
THE PRESIDENT: All those in favor
say Aye; opposed, No. The Ayes have it.
It is so ordered.
(Whereupon, at 3:05 P.M. the Convention
resolved itself into the Committee of the
Whole.)
(The mace was removed by the Sergeant-
at-Arms.)
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
NOVEMBER 30, 1967—3:05 P.M.
PRESIDENT H. VERNON ENEY,
PRESIDING
THE CHAIRMAN: The Committee of
the Whole will please come to order.
We resume consideration of Committee
Recommendation EB-1. We had concluded
with Amendment No. 16 and were about
to consider Amendment No. 17.
The Chair would like to inquire of Dele-
gate Morgan whether it would be desirable
for him to make any announcements as to
action of his Committee before we resume
consideration of the amendments.
Delegate Morgan.
DELEGATE MORGAN: Mr. Chairman,
the amendments that were adopted by the
Committee are in the process of being
printed at the present time. We do have
the attorney general amendment, which
was unanimously agreed to by the Com-
mittee, but the rest of the amendments
which are smaller in nature are not yet
ready and they will be ready in due course.
I would suggest at this time that Dele-
gate Maurer offer her second amendment.
THE CHAIRMAN: Very well. Amend-
ment No. 17 is proposed by Delegate
Maurer. Is it seconded?
(The amendment was duly seconded.)
THE CHAIRMAN: The amendment hav-
ing been seconded, the Chair recognizes
Delegate Maurer to speak to the amend-
ment.
DELEGATE MAURER: Mr. Chairman,
the effect of the Amendment No. 17 is to
provide that all heads of principal depart-
ments will be single executives, except in
the event that the state public school sys-
|
tem or any of the institutions of higher
learning are set up as principal depart-
ments.
The Minority Report as it was drawn, I
felt, did a disservice to the school system
and to the institutions of higher learning.
They provided that if they should become
a principal department, then the head of
it would be a single executive, in that event
doing away with the State Board of Edu-
cation and the Regents of the University.
As this amendment is drawn, it sets up
the exception and provides for single ex-
ecutives to head other agencies.
While I have been in on the debates in
the Committee very strong in my convic-
tion that the school system, both regular
schools and the schools representing higher
learning should be in a relatively protected
position I have changed my position on
other departments, but in all this time no
other group has spoken for the mainte-
nance of a board to head their particular
department. That is, I have not seen and
not heard of any requests that there be
either a board to head the principal de-
partment which might deal with health or
with welfare, and I suggest that this
amendment would provide a clean line of
organization in our executive branch.
Thank you.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Morgan.
DELEGATE MORGAN: Mr. Chairman,
I rise in opposition to the amendment pro-
posed by Delegate Maurer.
It seems to me that there may be oc-
casions when the legislature would deem
it essential to have a board or commission
head a principal department. For example,
if the Department of Chesapeake Bay Af-
fairs should be a principal department,
why it is necessary to have various in-
terests on the Bay represented on the
board to head that principal department.
I just do not believe it is a wise thing
to do to put the legislature in a straight-
jacket and say, "You have got to do it this
way, and no other way", and I think there
may be many reasons, many occasions
where you require a continuity of policy
or you require regional representation or
representation of various interests.
I think it may be very necessary for the
legislature to have a board or a commission
head a principal department of govern-
ment in that case, and for that reason I am
opposed to the amendment, Mr. Chairman.
|
