|
initiate a petition and get a convention at
a much earlier date.
While it is true that only Judge Sherbow
and I would have been members of that
Convention from among the present dele-
gates, even so we would have had a con-
vention some thirty years sooner.
In other areas of the country this kind
of constitutional initiative has proved par-
ticularly successful in some places. I am
not unaware that there are situations in
which it has not done so well, and I will
tell you where it is. It has not done very
well in California. There are a lot of things
that do not do very well in California, and
one reason that this did not work in Cali-
fornia was that the petition required a
very low percentage of signatures, and
they got in the habit in California of sign-
ing petitions and they have not been able
to get out of it. The average size of the
petition across the country in this respect
is ten percent, exactly where I have placed
it here.
Michigan was able a few years ago to get
their constitutional convention going only
because they had this in their constitution,
and the current issue of the Journal of the
American Judicatory Society tells what is
happening in Oklahoma. There is a move-
ment for judicial reform in Oklahoma very
much like the one that we have just en-
dorsed, and the reason that it is being put
on the ballot in Oklahoma this year is that
there was a petition of this sort being
circulated, and the General Assembly of
Oklahoma or the state legislature of Okla-
homa decided that they would get their
own version of it on the ballot first, so that
is the way it got on there. This is another
case of the shotgun.
I do not think that anyone here is wise
enough to predict what particular piece
of the Constitution may arouse in the peo-
ple of Maryland a desire to do this thing,
but I suggest that such items will arise,
and it seems to me the part of wisdom
on the part of this Convention to make
provision for it.
I am not asking, as an earlier delegate
did, that you give this amendment a unani-
mous vote. I would be very happy with 100
affirmative votes.
THE CHAIRMAN: Before asking for
questions of the sponsor of the amend-
ment, Delegate Winslo'w, in the second sec-
tion of Committee Recommendation S&E-1,
"dealing with the referendum", the refer-
ence is to "registered voters." In the first
section of Committee Recommendation S&E-
|
2 dealing with eligible voters, there is in
effect a definition of qualified voters, and I
believe that in the other articles dealing
with the executive branch and legislative
branch we have referred consistently to
"qualified voters."
Would it satisfy you to leave to the
Committee on Style the question of whether
the first word in line 14 should under all
circumstances be "qualified" or "regis-
tered?"
DELEGATE WINSLOW: I should be
very happy to leave it to the Style Com-
mittee.
THE CHAIRMAN: Will the Chairman
of the Committee on Style then please make
a note of that? The first word in line 14
of Amendment No. 1 is "qualified". The
question is should it remain "qualified" or
be "registered".
Are there any questions of the sponsor
of the amendment?
Delegate Mason, Delegate Winslow has
only one minute, so will you state your
question promptly?
DELEGATE MASON: Delegate Wins-
low, you stated in California experience has
not been too good with this type of initia-
tive. What percentage of the voters are
permitted on the petition in that state?
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Winslow.
DELEGATE WINSLOW: Eight per cent
with no geographic spread.
THE CHAIRMAN : Are there any other
questions?
Delegate Boyer.
DELEGATE BOYER: Mr. Chairman, I
hope my question will not necessarily be
construed in opposition, but I have discov-
ered a slight inconsistency that disturbs
me, and I thought since these records will
be historical, and perhaps for posterity,
Delegate Winslow would like to explain
something to me here.
Reading from the 17th Report of the
Commission Committee on Miscellaneous
Provisions, November 21, 1966, I note that
Delegate Winslow was invited to attend one
of the meetings to give his views on this
particular subject.
The present language that General Pro-
visions has adopted out of the Commission
draft is in a large measure a result of his
suggestions.
I wonder if you would clarify your stand
or your position today?
|
