|
was not fully considered and was not fully
explained. I think, therefore, that it would
be very desirable for the Committee to
reconsider the vote that was taken at that
time together with a full, clear, and lucid
explanation of the purpose of this amend-
ment.
I shall give you what I consider to be the
purpose of the amendment and then leave
it to other and more experienced hands to
fill in perhaps more of the details.
The committee recommendation as it now
stands would provide two things for eligi-
bility to vote in a particular area. First, he
would have to have been a resident of the
state for six months. Nothing in the James
amendment seeks to change that. I want to
emphasize that right away. Nothing in the
James amendment seeks to change that.
The second requirement is that the voter
would also have to have been a resident
for three months next preceding the elec-
tion in the delegate district in which he
comes to vote. The James amendment
would change that and provide that the
requirement to vote in addition to the six
months would be that the proposed voter
would be a resident of the delegate district
as of the time of the closing of registra-
tion.
This is a pretty esoteric concept and
perhaps 1 can illustrate it with an ex-
ample.
As you all know, I live just down the
road from a well-known sheep farmer, in
Sparks, Maryland, which is not too far
from Harford County. Let us assume that
I have built a house and am going to move
into Harford County and I do move from
Sparks to Harford County within the
three-month period. Follow that? I have
moved within the three-month period but
before the books have closed in Harford
County.
Now under the Committee Recommenda-
tion as it is now before you, I could not
vote in Harford County, although I am
going to live there perhaps for the rest of
my life and even though the books were
still open for registration there. I would
have to go back to Baltimore County, vote
for county officers in this county, perhaps
vote for the bond issues that are up in that
county, which do not really mean a thing
to me. How much better it would be if I
could vote in Harford County, the place to
"which I have moved. We vote in essence
for the future, not for the past.
So in voting for the future, I would
Want to vote, it seems to me, for the people
|
who are going to represent me in Harford
County from that time on.
Additionally, it would be no real con-
cern of mine as to what the financial situa-
tion in Baltimore County was and yet I
would be allowed to vote for the bond issue
in Baltimore County where I would no
longer pay taxes but I could not vote in
Harford County for a bond issue up there
where I would be paying taxes.
It seems to me on a very practical basis
the James amendment is a good amend-
ment.
It has been suggested that it might be
difficult to change the registration so
quickly. I sug-gest to you that with the
advent of computers, and the advent of
other sources of informational retrieval
which we do not even know now, it would
probably be quite simple.
THE CHAIRMAN: You have a quarter
minute, Delegate Case.
DELEGATE CASE: The fact of the
matter is that hooking the requirement
into the registration date gives a degree
of flexibility which can be met with all our
modern means of transmission of informa-
tion and does not stereotype it and stand-
ardize it in the Constitution. I think Dele-
g-ate James offered a good amendment. I
think it is workable now. I think it will
bring fairness. I think what we have in
the proposed constitution is stereotyped
and in the case I mentioned, would be un-
fair. I, therefore, think that we ought to
reconsider this vote and I think we ought
to pass the James amendment.
THE CHAIRMAN: Does any other dele-
gate desire to speak in opposition to the
motion to reconsider?
Delegate Koss.
DELEGATE KOSS: Mr. Chairman,
since Delegate Case has spoken to the
substance of Amendment No. 5, I assume
it is in order to speak in opposition.
THE CHAIRMAN: On motion for re-
consideration the subject matter of the
principal question may be discussed fully.
DELEGATE KOSS: The Committee was
very fully aware of the constitutional
amendment that was passed last year by
the Senate which would have accomplished
the same thing as Delegate James' amend-
ment would do. In all our deliberations, we
tried to find out how many people would
really be affected by the operation of this
present system. While we would be most
|
