|
Has every delegate voted? Does any
delegate desire to change his vote?
(There was no response.)
The Clerk will record the vote.
There being 121 votes in the affirmative
and 1 in the negative, the motion carries.
The rules are suspended. The Chair recog-
nizes Delegate Scanlan to move the adop-
tion of the resolution.
DELEGATE SCANLAN: I believe the
resolution is self-explanatory. The printed
rules as they now stand are the official
rules of the Convention.
I believe the adoption of this resolution
is necessary and I move its adoption.
THE PRESIDENT: Is there a second?
(The motion was duly seconded.)
THE PRESIDENT: Are you ready for
the question?
(Call for the question.)
The question arises on the adoption of
Resolution No. 25. Delegate Wheatley.
DELEGATE WHEATLEY: Mr. Presi-
dent, before voting, may 1 ask a question
of the Chairman of the Rules Committee?
THE PRESIDENT: Delegate Scanlan,
do you yield to a question?
DELEGATE SCANLAN: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: Delegate Wheatley.
DELEGATE WHEATLEY: In so vot-
ing, are we incorporating by reference the
comments made by the Rules Committee
in their commentary of the various rules
as they were presented?
DELEGATE SCANLAN: No. Those are
just the comments of the Committee and
no more binding than the comments of any
other delegate.
We are just adopting the text of the
rules. Their interpretation would rest with
the Chair and Parliamentarian as the rule
of the Convention.
THE PRESIDENT: Delegate Wheatley.
DELEGATE WHEATLEY: Are we in-
corporating by reference the explanations
given by the committee as given in their
written memorandum?
THE PRESIDENT: Delegate Scanlan.
DELEGATE SCANLAN: Again, I would
give the same answer. To the extent that
|
a later interpretation of the Chair were
different from the explanation given in the
Committee Report, the Chair's ruling would
govern, providing the Convention did not
overrule it in an appeal.
THE PRESIDENT: Delegate Wheatley.
DELEGATE WHEATLEY: Mr. Chair-
man, I would like to speak against the
motion.
THE PRESIDENT: You may proceed.
DELEGATE WHEATLEY: Mr. Chair-
man, many of the rules we have adopted
are not the same rules which are prevail-
ing in other legislative bodies, and there-
fore the adoption of such rules, it seems to
me, is tantamount to accepting the explana-
tion of the reason for these rules that have
been advanced from time to time by the
Rules Committee.
I take it from the comments of the Chair-
man of the Rules Committee that the rea-
sons given for the adoption of these rules
are no longer in existence. Unless I mis-
stated my question or he has misstated his
answer, I would be highly reluctant to vote
for a set of rules on which there is no
history of why the original votes were
taken.
Perhaps he might like me to restate my
question or he might wish me to restate
my question.
DELEGATE SCANLAN: I thought his
question was, were the comments, explana-
tions and reasons of the committee binding
and controlling on the Convention as an
authoritative interpretation of the rules.
My answer was that those comments
would not be. Hopefully the Chair in apply-
ing any of the rules would adhere to the
legislative history of the particular rule
in the case where there was any ambi-
guity; if the Chair did not, however, his
ruling would be binding except that any
delegate could appeal the ruling from the
Chair and then could rely on the legislative
history as argument.
I do not think the arguments of our
Committee can be any more binding on the
meaning of the rule than the comments of
other committees in their committee re-
ports would be binding on the court in in-
terpreting the provisions in the constitution.
They are not a substitute for the rule
itself.
THE PRESIDENT: Delegate Wheatley.
DELEGATE WHEATLEY: Mr. Chair-
man, I am not certain that I understand
|
