|
Is there any further discussion of
Amendment No. 5?
Delegate Bamberger.
DELEGATE BAMBERGER: Mr. Chair-
man, I rise to speak against the amend-
ment, and I hope that if what I have to
say is not correct, that either the Chair-
man of the Committee or some member of
the Committee will give this Committee of
the Whole some guidance on the intention
of the Committee and the amendments that
are offered, so that we will not be required
to spend the entire night here debating and
discussing matters which I presume were
debated and discussed in the Committee it-
self.
I speak against Amendment No. 5 be-
cause, as I understand the comments on
this floor, the Court of Appeals has said
that delegates to a constitutional conven-
tion are not offices of profit. If that is so, if
that is what the court has held, I do not
see why we must state it in the constitution.
If there is a reason to repeat in the
constitution the holding of the Court of
Appeals that delegates to a constitutional
convention do not occupy offices of profit,
then I wonder why we are not stating here
all of the offices of profit or all of the offices
which have been held by the Court of Ap-
peals not to be offices of profit.
I urge you to vote against the amend-
ment, unless the Committee did think about
this at some point and can offer some as-
sistance to those of us who are hearing
about it for the first time.
THE CHAIRMAN: Does any other dele-
gate desire to speak in favor of the amend-
ment?
(There was no response.)
Does any delegate desire to speak in op-
position?
Delegate Koss.
DELEGATE KOSS: Mr. Chairman,
Members of the Committee:
I rise in great trepidation to speak
against this. I think I was the only person
who appeared before the General Assembly
at the time the enabling legislation was
being discussed and urged that members
of the General Assembly not be considered
eligible to run as candidates for the office
of delegate to the Constitutional Conven-
tion.
In action previously we have determined
that there be no conflict of interest in our
|
judiciary. We have prohibited lawyers from
practicing law. We have in our legislative
article introduced something in terms of
a conflict of interest.
I am aware full well of the offices of
profit as determined by the General As-
sembly that are occupied by delegates to
the Constitutional Convention.
I consider this indeed an office of trust,
and I would hope that you would apply the
same standards to future conventions and
the delegates therein as you do to the
branches of our government.
Thank you.
THE CHAIRMAN: Is there any fur-
ther discussion?
(There 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 to Committee Recom-
mendation R&P-2.
A vote Aye is a vote in favor of Amend-
ment No. 5. A vote No is a vote against.
Cast your votes.
Has every delegate voted? Does any dele-
gate desire to change his vote?
(There was no response.)
The Clerk will record the vote.
There being 43 votes in the affirmative
and 67 in the negative, the motion is lost.
The amendment is rejected.
Delegate Sickles, do you now desire to
offer your amendment AD?
DELEGATE SICKLES: I do, Mr. Chair-
man.
THE CHAIRMAN: The amendment has
already been distributed. It will be num-
ber 6.
The Clerk will read the amendment.
READING CLERK: Amendment No. G
to Committee Recommendation R&P-2, by
Delegate Sickles:
On page 2 section 5 Limitation of Hold-
ing Office in line 23 strike out the period
and insert in lieu thereof the following
words: ", except as may be provided by
law."
THE CHAIRMAN: Is the amendment
seconded?
|
