|
to his amendment. We will take it up first.
1 Then we will consider Delegate Needle's
I amendment and the Chair very much ap-
1 preciates the position taken by Delegates
B Bororn and Boyce.
1 DELEGATE BARRICK: Mr. Chairman,
I I will be very brief. My amendment would
I eliminate the word "general" in line 11,
H which would read, "unless otherwise pro-
• vided by law." I think it has been made
B very clear that if we do this the General
B Assembly could in an affirmative way pass
B on these election laws on a county by county
B basis by setting the time of the election.
B It seems to me this is desirable in order
to get the flexibility we have been looking
for. We have been flexible in giving Balti-
more City what they want, and I submit we
can be flexible in giving each county what
they want. I can see metropolitan areas of
our State may wish to have all their elec-
tions at the same time other than the time
when state officials are running. However,
in the more rural areas, it is imperative in
Imy opinion that state officers run at the
same time the county officers run.
This gives a somewhat longer ballot,
gives much more interest in the election,
and in my opinion it brings out a much
larger vote than if we would only have our
county issues in question.
The idea is for flexibility so that we can
deal with our different counties by law in
different ways. It would give the General
Assembly the flexibility that I think is de-
sirable to have in this particular instance.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Schloeder,
do you desire to respond to Delegate Bar-
rick's support of Amendment No. 21-A to
take the word "general" out of line 11?
1 DELEGATE SCHLOEDER: I am sorry,
Mr. Chairman. I was out of the room and
just came in. I would hate to have him re-
peat all that, but could he sum it up in a
word or two?
THE CHAIRMAN: No, you will catch
the drift. Delegate Hanson, do you desire
to reply?
1 DELEGATE HANSON: Mr. Chairman,
I I think I already replied to Delegate Bar-
1 rick. I think the degree of flexibility which
1 is desirable is contained in the language as
B we used it. It would permit those things
B which we have discussed on the floor before
B in the way of options available to the Gen-
| eral Assembly in the form of general public
I law. I do not think we should be in the
B position of having the General Assembly
I
|
act for each county without a considera-
tion of what it has been doing for other
counties in this area. For that reason, I
feel it is very important that we retain the
phrasing as it has been used in my amend-
ment and I would hope Senator Barrick's
amendment is rejected.
THE CHAIRMAN: Any other delegate
desire to speak in favor of the amendment?
Delegate Byrnes.
DELEGATE BYRNES: Mr. Chairman,
I have a parliamentary inquiry, if I might.
THE CHAIRMAN: State the inquiry.
DELEGATE BYRNES: For the record,
it would be helpful to make it clear whether
adoption of Amendment No. 21 would strike
out Amendment No. 14.
THE CHAIRMAN: You are talking now
about Amendment 21, not 21-A, I take it?
DELEGATE BYRNES: 21, sir.
THE CHAIRMAN: If Amendment No. 21
is adopted, it would eliminate the last two
paragraphs of section 7, which would, of
course, include the second paragraph as
amended by Amendment No. 14.
Delegate Clagett.
DELEGATE CLAGETT: Mr. Chairman,
another parliamentary inquiry. How can
we get to a vote on section 7 eliminating
Amendment No. 14 ?
THE CHAIRMAN: The effect of Amend-
ment No. 14, you mean apart from a con-
sideration of Amendment No. 21?
DELEGATE CLAGETT: Well, as I un-
derstand it, Amendment No. 21 is before
us now and we are going to have to yea
or nay on that.
THE CHAIRMAN: If it is adopted, it in
effect nullifies everything done in Amend-
ment No. 14.
DELEGATE CLAGETT: Then my ques-
tion is how can we go back and vote on
section 7 as the Committee originally rec-
ommended it.
THE CHAIRMAN: To move to recon-
sider Amendment No. 14.
DELEGATE CLAGETT: If 21 is adopt-
ed—
THE CHAIRMAN: I thought you said
if 21 is rejected.
DELEGATE CLAGETT: If 21 is rejected.
Now the other side of the coin. If 21 is
|
