|
considered anything more than nomina-
tions. However, they are administered with
the same rules that govern elections.
THE CHAIRMAN: Do you have a fur-
ther question, Delegate Chabot?
DELEGATE CHABOT: Yes, sir.
I understand that. However, I still want
to know if the General Assembly would
have the power to provide for run-off
primaries if we eliminate this clause.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Cardin.
DELEGATE CARDIN: I would have to
say yes, it could.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Chabot.
DELEGATE CHABOT: Then this is a
substantive change as well as a technical
change.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Cardin.
DELEGATE CARDIN: Yes, viewed in
that light it would be.
THE CHAIRMAN: Are there any fur-
ther questions of the sponsors of the
amendment?
If not, the Chair recognizes Delegate
Ross to speak in opposition.
DELEGATE ROSS: Mr. Chairman and
fellow delegates: I think the colloquy has
brought out the primary, excuse my use
of the term, rather, the basic reason that
the Committee inserted this language. It
wanted to make sure that the General As-
sembly would not have the power in the
case of the nomination to provide for a
run-off election.
While you are aware of the fact that I
cannot claim any legal qualification, it does
not seem to me that the inclusion of this
word or reference to primaries here in any
way affects the other sections of this ar-
ticle. I think, as I said, the substantive
effect of this is to permit the General As-
sembly to provide that nominees have to
receive a majority vote, and therefore
makes very real the possibility of run-off
elections.
THE CHAIRMAN: Does any other dele-
gate desire to speak in favor of the amend-
ment?
Delegate Carson.
DELEGATE CARSON: To my knowl-
edge, there is nothing in the Constitution
today concerning primaries. If there is, I
will be corrected. It seems to me that the
|
addition of section 8 with this language
in regard to primaries is, at best, con-
fusing.
The section preceding that has made
only one reference to primaries, and that
is in section 6 where it has given the Gen-
eral Assembly the right to establish or
provide for the nomination of candidates.
It does not state when that nomination
would take place, how it would take place,
or treat it in any other manner.
The Chairman has attempted to make
clear that the other sections of this article
will not deal with primaries. Then inex-
plicably in section 8 you get something
specifically with regard to primaries, some-
thing not in today's Constitution.
I suggest that leaving this language in
section 8 is at best confusing. To take it
out would make it clear, and I have no
question that the General Assembly will
continue as it has in the past without the
constitutional requirement.
I urge you to vote in favor of the
amendment.
THE CHAIRMAN: Does any other dele-
gate desire to speak in opposition to the
amendment?
Delegate Byrnes.
DELEGATE BYRNES: Mr. Chairman,
I would like to direct a question to the
Chairman at the appropriate time.
THE CHAIRMAN: Does any delegate
desire to speak in opposition first?
Delegate Chabot.
DELEGATE CHABOT: Mr. Chairman,
this provision was put in here not to con-
fuse, and I submit that this does in fact
not confuse. It is not presently in the
Constitution.
I, as well as many other of the delegates
here, fought and bled during the 1966
primary election. I recognize the great
temptation that -many had, after that pri-
mary election, to provide some way in
which there could have been a second bite
at the apple, other than the one we had in
November.
It was for that reason, in recognition of
that temptation, and on sober second
thoughts a year after those primaries, that
the Committee concluded that it would be
a bad thing if the legislature did it. In
this particular area essentially the same
sort of reasons which governed the rest
|
