|
DELEGATE J. CLARK (presiding) :
The Chair recognizes Delegate Koss.
DELEGATE KOSS: Delegate Dukes, in
your interpretation, therefore, would lot-
tery be dependent upon whether or not it
raised money?
DELEGATE J. CLARK (presiding) :
Delegate Dukes.
DELEGATE DUKES: You mean whether
or not it was successful or whether or not
it was intended to raise money?
DELEGATE KOSS: Well, its primary
intent, just baldly that. The reason for my
question is that Chairman Sherbow said
that in the so-called give-aways dependent
upon a purchase, he would interpret that as
a lottery.
DELEGATE J. CLARK (presiding) :
Delegate Dukes.
DELEGATE DUKES: Your question is?
DELEGATE J. CLARK (presiding) :
Delegate Koss.
DELEGATE KOSS: Would you give it
the same interpretation?
DELEGATE J. CLARK (presiding):
Delegate Dukes.
DELEGATE DUKES: Yes.
DELEGATE J. CLARK (presiding) :
Delegate Koss.
DELEGATE KOSS: Then my next ques-
tion is that Delegate Sherbow said that the
intention of the majority was to continue
the same language which is now in section
36 and the same effect. Would it not be
true then that these games were now
illegal?
DELEGATE J. CLARK (presiding):
Delegate Dukes.
DELEGATE DUKES: I do not think
that the interpretation placed on the lan-
guage proposed by Judge Sherbow is a con-
tinuation of the same thing that the pres-
ent prohibition says. I disagree with that.
I think the present prohibition says that
the State may not make grants and there-
fore it would prohibit state action or state
authorized actions. As I understood Judge
Sherbow, anything, regardless of whether
the State sanctioned it, authorized it, per-
mitted it or otherwise would be prohibited
by an individual if it were a lottery under
the new language. In my opinion the old
language did not go that far.
DELEGATE J. CLARK (presiding) :
The Chair recognizes Delegate Vecera.
|
DELEGATE VECERA: Delegate Dukes,
what is the construction of the word "lot-
tery" as it is presently being used in the
Majority Report?
DELEGATE J. CLARK (presiding):
Delegate Dukes.
DELEGATE DUKES: I have no idea.
DELEGATE J. CLARK (presiding) :
Delegate Vecera.
DELEGATE VECERA: If we have no
idea, then how are we to vote intelligently
upon a word if we have no conception as
to what the meaning1 is?
DELEGATE J. CLARK (presiding):
Delegate Dukes.
DELEGATE DUKES: Do what I tell
you.
(Laughter.)
DELEGATE J. CLARK (presiding):
The Chair recognizes Delegate Vecera.
DELEGATE VECEUA: I have one more
question. What is that?
DELEGATE J. CLARK (presiding):
Delegate Dukes.
DELEGATE DUKES: I would try to
tell you quickly so that you could follow.
DELEGATE J. CLARK (presiding) :
Delegate Vecera.
DELEGATE VECERA: What do you
tell us to do?
DELEGATE J. CLARK (presiding):
Delegate Dukes.
DELEGATE DUKES: 1 discussed with
the Chairman of the Committee a couple
of days ago whether or not it was actually
necessary to submit some form of amend-
ment and I suggested to him it was our
position unless he indicated otherwise that
the vote on the issue could be focused
simply by a vote for the Committee pro-
posal which would be in favor of the ban
as proposed, a vote against the Committee
Recommendation if it did not, so unless
the issue changes by amendment or some
other means as I understand it, subject
to correction by Judge Sherbow or the
Chair, if you were in favor of the ban in
the constitution, you would vote for the
Committee Recommendation, if you were
ag-ainst it in its present form or any form
you would vote against the Committee
Recommendation .
DELEGATE J. CLARK (presiding):
Delegate Vecera.
|
