|
Delegate Hardwicke because he related it
to what in effect is proposed by the Com-
mittee in section 3.18 that we have already
gone through in other sections of the Com-
mittee's reports on mandating the legis-
lature on certain things. It has been clear
from the testimony here and it is clear in
the court proceedings that if 'the legislature
should decide not to do those things, there
is no mandamus proceedings to force the
legislature to do it.
Now, as I understand the delegate's sug-
gestion, it is that we do the same thing
here with respect to these provisions which
are to be done by rule, but if in fact they
do not do it, then there is no kind of re-
course to force them to do it. I think that
would leave us with a procedure that would
be entirely the opposite of what the ma-
jority of the Committee has recommended,
so I would like to get some clarification of
what the Chair has in mind.
THE CHAIRMAN: The Chair's prin-
cipal suggestion was to separate in two sec-
tions the portions which the Committee has
indicated quite clearly are not merely man-
datory, but as to which they expect literal
compliance, so that there would be no ques-
tion as to these, and have in a separate
section the other portions of the section,
as to something less than literal compli-
ance that might be possible, or to put it
another way, that failure to have literal
compliance would not necessarily invalidate
the legislation.
The Chair merely suggested that Dele-
gate Hardwicke's suggestion might be one
way of doing this. I did not mean to indi-
cate that Delegate Gallagher had agreed
that that would be the way to do it. The
only thing he has agreed to do is to try to
separate the two matters into two separate
sections, and in some way to indicate what
difference there may be between them. This
may prove to be impossible. We will have
to see.
Delegate Gleason.
DELEGATE GLEASON: Just let me
conclude by commenting. Mr. Chairman,
that with this kind of dialogue and this
kind of procedure, I think we are in danger
of losing the entire section. There was cer-
tainly no confusion in our mind as to what
we intended to do and I think the majority
of the delegates would have understood it.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Barrick.
DELEGATE BARRICK: Mr. Chairman,
I would like to suggest that possibly if we
voted on this amendment that has been of-
|
fered, we would get the consensus of the
Committee, and it might not be necessary
for Mr. Gallagher to retire.
THE CHAIRMAN: Let the Chair say,
the suggestion he made was merely a sug-
gestion and can be carried out only in the
absence of objection. If any delegate de-
sires to proceed with the consideration of
Amendment No. 20, we shall do so.
Delegate Gallagher.
DELEGATE GALLAGHER: I would
hope, Mr. Chairman, that the ladies and
gentlemen would give us an opportunity to
see if we can work this out to our complete
and mutual satisfaction.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate James, the
amendment is your amendment. Would you
indicate your disposition? Would you be
willing to have it laid aside for the mo-
ment and consideration given to section 3.18
and then come back to this?
DELEGATE JAMES: Well, I do not
like to be hard to get along with, but I
would like to have a vote on this.
THE CHAIRMAN: Very well.
Is there any further discussion?
Delegate Della.
DELEGATE DELLA: Mr. Chairman,
this particular sentence, that the Commit-
tee has adopted all final committee votes
on all bills, Mr. Chairman, I do not know
how that could even be carried out.
If a bill is sent to a committee, you only
need three signatures in the Senate to bring
it out. Now, if you cannot get three signa-
tures on a bill that is in a committee with
an unfavorable report, Lord help the bill.
Now, in the House, to recall a bill from a
committee, that requires fifteen signatures.
I think we are getting into serious deep
water, especially when, or if you consider
bonds.
I do not know whether this particular
phrase requires the committee to have a
journal and whether those votes must be
recorded in that journal of that committee,
or when the Chairman must report that a
committee had acted on a bill which they
may have voted unfavorable today, that
they can reconsider tomorrow and bring it
out with a favorable report. What I think
you are doing is littering, frankly filling
up the journal of that particular house
with a lot of reports that may be changed
from one day to another. Then I come to
the responsibility of the Chairman himself.
When shall he report that a Committee
|
