|
DELEGATE SCHLOEDER: Yes, that is
my understanding1 of it. No question about
it. I think, I assumed Mrs. Maurer's ques-
tions would be aimed at something that
was different from that particular situa-
tion.
DELEGATE J. CLARK (presiding):
The Chair recognizes Delegate Child.
DELEGATE CHILD: Delegate Schloe-
der, as I understand it, the county officials
of every county, that is twenty-three coun-
ties of the State, were elected in 1966, is
that correct?
DELEGATE SCHLOEDER: Yes, sir.
DELEGATE CHILD: They would be up
for election or re-election in 1970.
DELEGATE SCHLOEDER: Yes, under
the present Constitution.
DELEGATE CHILD: You propose to
move that election ahead one year.
DELEGATE SCHLOEDER: No, we pro-
pose to move it back one year to 1971.
There would be no election in 1969. County
officials would be elected in 1971. These
men ran for a four-year term. I do not
think it would be fair to reduce their term.
I think that adding a year onto the term
in order to get this greater visibility, this
greater citizen participation, would be
something that would be beneficial.
DELEGATE CHILD: If they ran in
1966, would not the election for their suc-
cessors be held in 1970, four years hence.
DELEGATE J. CLARK (presiding):
Delegate Schloeder.
DELEGATE SCHLOEDER: They would
be under the present Constitution but not
under our proposal, our article.
DELEGATE CHILD: Under your pro-
posal, their terms would have to be ex-
tended one year, would they not?
DELEGATE SCHLOEDER: Yes, sir.
DELEGATE J. CLARK (presiding):
Delegate Child.
DELEGATE CHILD: Is your idea to
bring the counties in line with Baltimore
City?
DELEGATE J. CLARK (presiding):
Delegate Schloeder.
DELEGATE SCHLOEDER: No, I would
not phrase it exactly that way. I think that
is the effect but there was no idea just to
bring the counties into line with Baltimore
|
City. We just feel that having the county
elections separate from the state elections
provides for greater candidate and issue
visibility and that we are going to g-et
better candidates and a fuller debate and
discussion of issues in this particular kind
of election.
It is just, I think, incidental that Balti-
more City has that sort of situation now.
I would say in all defense of the Baltimore
City system of elections that it has worked
successfully. I think there is every indica-
tion that the City of Baltimore does not
want to change.
But I do not want to g-ive any feeling here that because we are attempting1 to
bring the counties into line with Baltimore
City, it is simply a matter of convenience.
It is a matter of conviction. We believe this
is the best way to have an elective process,
to have it separate from the state and
from the presidential elections.
DELEGATE J. CLARK (presiding):
Delegate Child.
DELEGATE CHILD: Did your Commit-
tee trace the history of this section where-
by it was chang-ed in 1926, I believe.
DELEGATE SCHLOEDER: Yes, sir.
DELEGATE J. CLARK (presiding):
Delegate Child.
DELEGATE CHILD: Before that time
it was in the odd years, was it not?
DELEGATE J. CLARK (presiding):
Delegate Schloeder.
DELEGATE SCHLOEDER: As I under-
stand it, that is correct, sir.
DELEGATE J. CLARK (presiding):
Delegate Child.
DELEGATE CHILD: So that what you
propose to do now, is to go to all the
trouble which in 1926 the people went to all
the trouble to change; you propose to go to
all the trouble to change it back. Is that
right?
DELEGATE J. CLARK (presiding):
Delegate Schloeder.
DELEGATE SCHLOEDER: I would not
phrase it exactly that way, but I think,
again, that what we are attempting to do
is to provide for better visibility on issues
and candidates, to lessen the coattail ef-
fect. If we sometimes have to step back to
a pre- or mid-1920 tradition, I think we
should be able to do that. I think the situa-
tion has changed now. It is a different
|
