|
land, that subcommittee has very wisely
suggested that there be a new rule and
that there be a joint committee of ethics,
and who shall be on this joint committee
of ethics? Why the members of the Gen-
eral Assembly, of course, and who shall
decide what is ethical and unethical? The
members of the General Assembly.
I submit to you this is not a very effec-
tive method of policing conflict of interest.
As a matter of fact, this very approach
was roundly criticized in an issue of the
Harvard Law Review where it was pointed
ont by the author that just as criminal
provisions to check the legislature placed
the initiative in the hands of the executive
and the remedy in those of the judiciary,
the implementing mechanism of the code
of ethics should be outside the legislature.
This is precisely what the Maryland legis-
lature will not do if it follows the recom-
mendations of a special subcommittee.
Now, ladies and gentlemen, I think that
a code of ethics and a regulation of con-
flict of interest is in the best interest of
the people of Maryland, and I submit to
you that you can put into the constitution
language which will be effective. I do ad-
mit, as a strictly legal matter, that nobody
can mandamus the General Assembly to
pass such legislation, but I submit that no
General Assembly is going to sit idly by
and pay no attention to a mandate of the
Constitutional Convention, particularly
when we have in this body messengers who
will go back to the General Assembly where
they served as senators and delegates and
tell them what the wishes of this Conven-
tion were as indeed I am sure they will.
I would urge you therefore to oppose this
amendment. It seems to me if there is any-
body in the State of Maryland that can
bring about some action on the part of the
legislature which is meaningful, it is this
Constitutional Convention. To say that you
do not like it, to say that there should be
a stronger method of handling the matter,
is not to address yourself to the problem.
Somebody must do it, and we are the best
designed body to accomplish it. I would
urge you therefore to defeat the amend-
ment.
THE CHAIRMAN: Is there any further
discussion? Does any delegate desire to
speak in favor?
(There was no response.)
Does any delegate desire to speak in
opposition?
Delegate Pascal.
|
DELEGATE PASCAL: Just briefly, Mr.
Chairman and fellow delegates, to reit-
erate what Chairman Gallagher said, there
were twenty-seven bills defeated in the last
four years. The last one passed the Senate
without one dissenting vote and never got
out of committee in the House. I say this
legislative counsel is taking up conflict of
interest programs, and I think this Con-
vention prompted that action. We had a
number of their leadership in front of our
committees, and they realized that we were
serious on it, and I think they took it up
with the idea of inflating our sales. The
attitude of this Convention is not again a
disrespect for the General Assembly. On
the contrary, we tightened our referendum
requirements, we have increased the sal-
ary, we have defeated provisions for initia-
tive, and I think we have got faith in the
General Assembly. However, I do not think
the general public has, and I am not here
to pontificate and try to determine why,
but it has been a long time in their views,
when people get involved in state govern-
ment they no longer have principle, they
are now crooks, and I do not know whether
conflict of interest legislation is going to
help or not, but I think it is a step for-
ward. I do not think a good constitution or
anything will make a bit of difference to
state government if we do not attract the
most qualified people in the government and
the state legislature would be the most dig-
nified office that one could hold. I think
this is going to be the secret of good gov-
ernment in the State.
Are you ready for the question?
(Call for the question.)
THE CHAIRMAN: The Clerk will ring
the quorum bell.
The question arises on the adoption of
Amendment No. 24 to Committee Recom-
mendation LB-2. A vote Aye is a vote in
favor of Amendment No. 24. A vote No is
a vote against. Cast your votes.
Has every delegate voted? Does any dele-
gate desire to change his vote?
(There was no response.)
The Clerk will record the vote.
There being 50 votes in the affirmative
and 61 in the negative, the motion is lost.
The amendment is rejected.
We come now to a consideration of sec-
tion 3.01a. Are there any amendments to
section 3.01a.
Delegate Dukes,
|
