|
interested in eliminating any unfairness,
at the same time we did not want to jeop-
ardize what is a very important principle
that is involved in establishing residence.
To quote from a publication on the right
to vote and what it means and what the
implications are: "A reasonable minimum
period of residence, by assuring that a
voter is a bonafide resident could serve to
prevent various abuses such as multiple
voting, persons declaring themselves resi-
dents of several places and voting several
times or temporary settlement of an area
by nonresidents for the purpose of in-
fluencing an election."
Certainly the Committee had every de-
sire to be fair and to extend the fran-
chise as widely as could be clone respon-
sibly. At the same time, the Committee
felt it incumbent on it to protect the in-
tegrity of the electoral process.
For this reason, we would not accept the
provision that registration or the residence
requirement in the delegate district be
tied to the time for closing of registration.
As Delegate Case has made very clear,
while now the closing of the books occurs
either four or five weeks before an election,
it is very possible that with the advent of
sophisticated electronic equipment, it would
be possible administratively to do this in
three or four days. First of all we would
seriously question the ability of a person
who comes into a house district three or
four days before an election to cast a vote
intelligently. Small local elections, I am
sure, as you are all aware, do not attract
the same kind of coverage by mass media
and that means of informing voters is not
available.
Secondly in terms of single member dis-
tricts, and the number of voters involved
in those districts, we think that reducing1
the residence requirement to the level es-
tablished by the James amendment could
indeed be a dangerous thing and a threat
to the integrity of the electoral process. I
urge you to vote against reconsideration.
THE CHAIRMAN: Does any other dele-
gate desire to speak in favor of the motion
to reconsider?
Delegate Carson.
DELEGATE CARSON: Mr. Chairman,
ladies and gentlemen, I understand that the
only difference between the committee lan-
guage and the proposal, which I think ex-
cellent, by Delegate James, is this. That
under the Committee Recommendation
there is an absolute three-month period
which ties in with nothing else.
|
Article 33, section 3a has now specified
that the books close twenty-eight days
prior to the election. Senator James'
amendment would have the beneficial effect
of tying in this date to whatever the date
the book would close. It is now twenty-eight
days prior to the election.
This would permit the General Assembly
in its wisdom to decide when the transfer
could occur. I think as Delegate Case
pointed out it is beneficial to have a per-
son vote in that area in which he is a
resident and in which he is interested
rather than in an area which he has aban-
doned and to which he does not intend to
return.
I urge you to support the motion for re-
consideration and on the merits, I urge
you to support the James amendment.
THE CHAIRMAN: Does any other dele-
gate desire to be heard in opposition?
Delegate Rybczynski.
DELEGATE RYBCZYNSKI: Mr. Chair-
man, I would suggest all the same argu-
ments — or not all, but just about all — of
the same arguments we heard today for
reconsideration were heard last night. A
vote was resounding in favor of the Com-
mittee's report.
The one thing we have heard that is new
is the attempt to tie in the constitution to
a statute. This sounds very interesting.
I thought the reverse would be true.
That is to attempt to tie in the statutes to
the constitution. If we were to follow the
statutes in all phases and in all fields, it
would be a field day, would it not?
All the things we have heard today are
no different from the things we heard last
night. I strongly urge everyone to support
the majority opinion.
THE CHAIRMAN: Does any other dele-
gate desire to be heard in favor?
Delegate James.
DELEGATE JAMES: Mr. Chairman
and fellow delegates, there is one supple-
mental point I would like to call to your
attention. This has been brought to our
attention by the Association of Election
Supervisors.
Under the strict application of the pres-
ent rule when the three-month period
arises — of course, this is now six months in
the present law — a voter moving to an-
other district gets a certificate of removal
|
