|
ticket of a state candidate. This is the sort
of thing we will be confronted with if we
have state and local elections confused with
national elections. We here are trying to
shorten the ballot, but on the local level we
may not be.
The candidates we are taking off the
ballot in the local areas are administrative
officials who are not policymakers. We are
setting up a local government where we
will be electing policymakers at a local
level. These men should be able to run on
local issues or policy at local level free from
interference or influence by state and na-
tional politicians and state and national
elections. I am not saying for a moment
there is no relation or inter-relation be-
tween local and state government or local
and national government. But these men
should have a chance to express themselves.
I might also state when a local candidate
is running for office, many times he is lost
in the rush. He cannot even find a place
to put us his sticker. There is no room for
a bumper sticker. This might sound trite
and small, but I say that in order to have
effective enlightened local government, we
must have an effective and enlightened
electorate. If the local issues are lost in
state and national issues, then I think our
local government is going to be weakened.
I urge you to defeat the amendment and
support the committee recommendation.
DELEGATE J. CLARK (presiding) :
Delegate Schloeder, you have two and a
half minutes yet to allot.
DELEGATE SCHLOEDER: Mr. Chair-
man, I would like to hold that for myself
and speak whenever I am supposed to,
either before or after the minority. It does
not make any difference.
DELEGATE J. CLARK (presiding) :
Delegate Byrnes, do you want to use your
two minutes now?
DELEGATE BYRNES: I would like to,
and I will.
I think the issue comes down to a very
simple proposition. I think politicians would
say that of course we do not want to run
with someone else. We want to have the
opportunity to run in an odd year and use
all our time in office to get publicity and
run for the next level. We do not want to
be committed to this guy we have to run
with. I think we ought to be talking about
the interest of the people. It is clear in my
mind that it is in the interests of the
people to have tickets in a county and to
have county officials and state officials
|
working in harmony in the campaign, and
then working in harmony thereafter. To
have the offices create tension between
county and state officials in office, I think,
would be disastrous. I have never at any
time on this floor defended or criticized the
present system in Baltimore City. It is not
the issue. I have not addressed myself to
it. It proves nothing when you look at their
statistics on either side of the case.
The majority is trying to suggest a
change. I have taken the floor to present
to you the other side of that picture. There
are many in the counties who do not want
that change. There are many in Baltimore
City who do not want that change, either.
I suggest to you the simple proposition you
have before you. Do you want to create a
system of elections which according to all
the experts produces a very low turn-out
knowing that low turn-out reduces the in-
fluence of the poor and the independents?
Do you want to produce a system of elec-
tions which creates between the county and
state officials legislative and executive stress
and strain which is clearly not in the best
interests of government on both levels?
That is the issue before you, ladies and
gentlemen.
I urge you to adopt the amendment of
the minority.
DELEGATE J. CLARK (presiding) :
The Chair recognizes Delegate Schloeder
for two and a half minutes.
DELEGATE SCHLOEDER: Mr. Chair-
man, ladies and gentlemen, there was no
attempt on the part of the Committee to
in any way say that there was no inter-
relationship between levels of government.
In answer to Delegate Hanson's argument,
we want only to hold elected officials re-
sponsible for those problems that they can
do something about. That is all we want to
do. We feel our system does just this.
I also find intriguing the argument
against the constant discussion of candi-
dates and issues. It is especially interest-
ing when this argument comes from those
who would like to be most identified with
enlightened causes. It seems to me that the
constant discussion of issues and candi-
date could have nothing but a good effect
upon any elective system.
The cost of this majority recommenda-
tion would not be prohibitive. It would
amount to about one-tenth of one percent
of the total county budget in each county.
We feel that the visibility and the good
government that would be provided is cer-
|
