|
Whole last week that this report is
brought before you now and in our con-
sideration of it, it was just never sug-
gested that we put a limitation on the
terms.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Morgan,
may the Chair get at the question that
Delegate Gill wants in this matter? I as-
sume this Committee did discuss the ques-
tion of limitation of terms on the governor
inasmuch as it recommended a limitation.
DELEGATE MORGAN: It did.
THE CHAIRMAN: Were the reasons
which impelled the Committee to recom-
mend a limitation on the successive terms
to which the governor might be elected ap-
plicable to other statewide elected officials
or were they limited to the office of gov-
ernor?
DELEGATE MORGAN: Mr. Chairman,
I just do not think that the Committee ever
considered that.
THE CHAIRMAN: What I am getting
at is whether or not the reasons for putting
in the limitation for governor pertained
peculiarly to the office of governor or did
not.
DELEGATE MORGAN: I think they
really pertain peculiarly to the office of
governor and do not particularly pertain
to the office of comptroller or attorney
general.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Gill.
DELEGATE GILL: We are reconsider-
ing EB-1. Is it too late to add Amendment
No. 8 which would limit the comptroller's
job to two successive terms?
THE CHAIRMAN: It would be con-
sidered when Committee Recommendation
EB-1 is before the Convention on second
reading.
It would be open to amendment.
DELEGATE GILL: Thank you.
THE CHAIRMAN: Are there any fur-
ther questions?
Delegate Clagett.
DELEGATE CLAGETT: Delegate Mor-
gan, with reference to the first sec-tion and
the qualifications of the attorney general is
the five-year requirement equally applicable
to that person being a citizen of the State
as •well as a member of the bar of the
State?
DELEGATE MORGAN: It is just as a
member of the bar.
|
THE CHAIRMAN: Are there any fur-
ther questions?
Delegate Clagett?
DELEGATE CLAGETT: Now, with
reference to the second sentence, I do not
wish to repeat the points raised with re-
spect to built-in conflict of interest, but I
would like this clarification.
In lines 6 and 7, the General Assembly
may give duties and responsibilities by
law. I would assume that that could include
the appointment of all lawyers who will
make up the staff of this chief legal officer.
If that is true and that law provided
that he should appoint all lawyers, where
would the freedom exist with respect to the
appointment by the governor and the Gen-
eral Assembly of legal counsel as you
point out in your memorandum on line 51?
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Morgan.
DELEGATE MORGAN: I do not quite
see the logic of your question, because I
think you started off with a premise that
the attorney general shall appoint all law-
yers. I do not think that is necessarily
true. He certainly appoints all the lawyers
in the attorney general's office, all deputies,
but I do not think it means he has to ap-
point all lawyers.
TPIE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Clagett, I
think your question might be clearer if you
pinpoint the language in the recommenda-
tion to which you refer.
DELEGATE CLAGETT: Yes, Mr.
Chairman.
Let us start with the premise that the
General Assembly in its authority given in
line 7 prescribed by law that all legal of-
ficers shall be appointed by the attorney
general and it could do that, could it not?
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Morgan.
DELEGATE MORGAN: I suppose it
could, but I cannot imagine the General
Assembly doing it. For example, there is a
people's counsel in the Public Service Com-
mission which the General Assembly has
provided for and I cannot imagine the
General Assembly turning that around and
saying all those people should be appointed
like the attorney general.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Clagett.
DELEGATE CLAGETT: What would
be the status of an attorney general ap-
pointed by the governor, and what would
be his relationship to the chief legal officer,
|
