|
pleaded with us not to make the change
that was suggested by the majority be-
cause they rely very heavily on volunteer
assistance in winning their campaigns. I
think this can be carried over, not only
physical help but also financial help. If
you are going to elections three out of
every four years, you are going to be ask-
ing people to come out, nonpoliticians to
volunteer their physical help and their
financial help to work three in every four
years. It is clear to me this could be a
serious disadvantage.
Turning to the citizens themselves, I
think it is clear to us — and it was clear
way back in 1922, as Judge Child pointed
out — that the 1922 amendment, Article
XVII known as the 1922 Fewer Elections
amendment, reduced the number of elec-
tions statewide. This was a reaction to
(a), the cost and (b), not the financial
cost, but the cost in the interest of the
citizenry. You cannot expect people who
are not interested in politics basically to
become interested every year and concen-
trate as the majority would hope they
would do, on local issues for the campaign
period which could last six months of every
twelve, three of every four years. I think
it would become a rather mundane thing
in the lives of citizens to be faced with that
kind of politics. And the day, politics and
elections become a mundane thing, I think
we are all in trouble. I think the election
statistics I provided you for the various
levels indicate that already we have
reached the point where the citizens are
not responding to elections as we would
hope they would.
Putting the most important election, the
county elections, in the odd years certainly
would, we think, aggravate an already un-
fortunate situation.
I would like to cite, or, rather suggest to
you some other objections some members
of the Committee had to the majority
recommendation. Speaking to the question
of whether or not the people will respond
at all levels of the government, in all elec-
tions, we think this. We think that if a
citizen knows he has to vote on two levels,
for example, if he knows in 1966 he is
going to vote on the gubernatorial level
and the county level, we do not think he
becomes confused at all. We think he pre-
pares in advance to vote on both those
levels.
Statistics have proven to us that there
are those, as I pointed out, who go to the
gubernatorial election and do not vote on
the county level. I think it is fair to say
|
you are not going to change the indifference
of these people no matter when you have
the election. They are simply not interested
and are not going to become interested be-
cause you isolate the election and put it in
a different year.
We also think elections in three or four
years out of every four years will force
office holders in all levels of government to
devote more and more time to political ac-
tivities then they need to in the two of
every four years system, and also be forced
to make more political decisions in light of
current political emotions and activities. I
think we also have to know that the reap-
portionment decisions of the Supreme Court
will eventually carry down to county level
and we are going to have reapportionment
and redistricting problems time after time.
I think if you have elections three of every
four years, you are going to have people
running three of every four years and I
think unfortunate deals and trades are
going to be made relating to this question
of redistricting. It would be far better if
we had a period of rest every two years so
that rational decisions could be made in this
area without bias and prejudice that in-
evitably results from a current election.
I think we have to note also the cost of
campaigning to the candidates themselves
which is, I think, substantially increased
when you cannot share campaign costs as
you can when tickets are formed and there
are election levels merged.
Finally, I would point out to you that on
November 9 the Maryland Association of
Election Officials notified us of their oppo-
sition to odd-year elections. I quote from
that letter.
"The Association wishes to go on rec-
ord as opposed to annual elections in
view of the intolerable administrative
burden which this would impose on the
Boards of Supervisors of Elections
throughout the state and additional fi-
nancial burden on the taxpayers of the
counties involved. Upon contacting the
various boards, I find similar opposition
to elections three years out of every four
for the same reason."
I think I have covered very quickly all
the points I wanted to make and, as I say,
if there are any questions about any alle-
gations or statements I made that you
would like to have me document, I would
be happy to do so. I have the evidence if
you will hear.
DELEGATE J. CLARK (presiding) :
What the Chair would suggest is that we
|
