|
Quoting the Baltimore Sun again, it says
that, concerning recreation, in the "Action
Area" of the city's anti-poverty program in
Baltimore, where more than a fourth of the
children of Baltimore live, five of the city's
120 playgrounds are located. In the area of
legal rights in .the courts, many low-income
Negroes do not ever receive the same con-
sideration for legal rights as, say middle-
class Negroes or middle-class Whites. This
is why I have made this particular proposal.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Kiefer.
DELEGATE KIEFER: Mr. Chairman, I
rise to oppose this amendment. This matter
was discussed in great detail in our Com-
mittee. We had numerous hearings with
respect to the so-called economically de-
prived. One of the problems was defining an
economically deprived person. Some people
on a particular level consider themselves
economically deprived when they are ex-
tremely well off according to other groups.
In any event, the problem was handled.
We considered it, and it is part of Recom-
mendation No. 2, which we will come to in
due season. But there is a great difference
between this particular amendment and the
one that we adopted with respect to race
and color amendments.
The race and color amendments to the
14th Amendment were directed primarily
to those practices based upon discrimina-
tion because of race, color, or national ori-
gin. This particular amendment would in-
clude language that is not justiciable. How
would we know who is an indigent person?
What is a socially deprived person ? What
are we talking about here?
The law is supposed to be equal for all
people, and I am certain that you all will
agree with me that there is no basis for
setting up a distinction because of economic
status or social status.
I frankly do not see how this can be put
into the same category with race or color
or national origin. We have to draw a line
and keep this thing1 on the basis on which it
started out to be, namely, equal protection
of law for all people.
By adding a reference to particular
groups as to economic status which is not
definable, we get into hopeless confusion
and make a mockery of this provision. I
therefore strongly recommend that you vote
against this amendment.
THE CHAIRMAN: Does any other dele-
gate desire to speak in favor of the amend-
ment? Does any other delegate desire to
speak in opposition?
|
(T fiere was no response.)
Are you ready for the question ?
(Call for the question.)
The Clerk will ring the quorum bell.
The question arises on the adoption of
Amendment No. 5 as modified.
For what purpose does Delegate Taylor
rise ?
DELEGATE L. TAYLOR: I rise on a
point of inquiry.
THE CHAIRMAN: State the inquiry.
DELEGATE L. TAYLOR: At this time
may I withdraw the amendment?
THE CHAIRMAN: Yes, you may.
Do you desire to do so?
DELEGATE L. TAYLOR: Yes.
THE CHAIRMAN: Amendment No. 5 is
withdrawn.
Is Delegate Bothe in the chamber?
You have several amendments to section
4 — three, I think. Are they alternates?
DELEGATE BOTHE: I would prefer to
introduce Amendment No. J at this time.
THE CHAIRMAN: The others will not
be offered ?
DELEGATE BOTHE: There is one other
that is an alternative, but I want to put J
in now.
THE CHAIRMAN: Hold that just a min-
ute.
Delegate Taylor, do you still desire to
offer your Amendment X?
DELEGATE L. TAYLOR: Yes, Mr. Chair-
man.
DELEGATE KIEFER: Mr. Chairman.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Kiefer.
DELEGATE KIEFER: Point of inquiry.
THE CHAIRMAN: State the inquiry.
DELEGATE KIEFER: Amendment J is
to section 4, Search and Seizure.
THE CHAIRMAN: I said we would pass
that for a moment.
We are on section 3, and Amendment X
is with respect to section 3.
This will be Amendment No. 6. The
Clerk will read the amendment.
|
