|
have before you a proposition that a con-
stitutional convention can be convened at
any time, or put to the people at any time
by a majority of the General Assembly.
Truly if the situation should arise that
great public issues are left unattended by
the General Assembly, a bare majority of
that Assembly can put it to a constitutional
convention and the matter can be rectified.
In short, whatever justification there
once was for the constitutional initiative
has since passed into history and is a mem-
ory with George Norris.
THE CHAIRMAN: Does any other dele-
gate desire to speak in favor of the
amendment?
Delegate Byrnes.
DELEGATE BYRNES: I would point
out to Delegate Scanlan and members of
the Committee that we are living testimony
and witness to the fact that, despite the
fact that we are now reapportioned, we do
not leave the initiative for constitutional
amendment with the legislature. This very
Convention suggests that at times the
people must act.
I think the essence of Delegate Winslow's
proposition is that the people should retain
the basic control over their basic law. We
reject the initiative of legislation, and that
may have been a wise rejection. We are
now talking about the basic organic struc-
ture of our government, and I think it
behooves us to recognize that the people
retain that control.
I think we are representing that very
philosophy here today, and we should con-
tinue it by accepting the amendment sug-
gested by Delegate Winslow.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Pascal.
DELEGATE PASCAL: The same pro-
ponents I see for this indirect constitutional
initiative were almost the same on the
legislative initiative, and some of the rea-
sons we rejected it in committee were
these: First, the law would not have the
opportunity to come before the General
Assembly for debate, and the General As-
sembly would be a total representation.
Delegate Winslow proposes it come from
four counties of 23,000 signatures apiece,
and I suggest this is not the total repre-
sentation which a provision would get in
the General Assembly.
Now, another reason for the Committee's
rejection of indirect initiative was this, that
again a special interest group, well fi-
|
nanced, could turn the tide rather than the
total representation of this State, and I
think there is a great fear here. I think
this amendment should be rejected.
THE CHAIRMAN: Does any other dele-
gate desire to speak in favor of the
amendment?
Delegate Hanson.
DELEGATE HANSON: Mr. Chairman,
I rarely find myself in a position to dis-
agree with my colleague from Montgomery
County, Mr. Scanlan. I share his lack of
enthusiasm for the legislative initiative. I
was opposed to the legislative initiative and
I remain opposed to the legislative initiative.
I do not think that as a practical matter
it has fulfilled the promises that were made
for it when it was developed. I am a spon-
sor of this amendment, and I must say I
am a sponsor of it with some degree of
trepidation because of my lack of enthu-
siasm for initiatives generally.
The reason I sponsor it, however, is for
what I believe is a very practical reason
in the development of constitutional govern-
ment. It is quite true that a representative
and reapportioned legislature should be
able to handle the initiation of amendments
to the constitution. I think that it will be
able to handle them with one area of im-
portant exception, and that is the area of
reform of the legislative branch itself.
I believe we in this Convention have done
much from the point of view of our own
judgment in this place and in this time to
reform the legislature to improve its pro-
cedures and to make it an effective branch
of the government.
I think that all of us would confess, how-
ever, that we may not have the last word
in wisdom on what the future structure of
the legislature should be. I think the one
thing that we can observe is that there is
probably no group of people in creation less
likely to reform themselves than the mem-
bers of the legislature when the time for
that reform has arrived, and it is for this
reason that it seems to me that we should
provide in the constitution a means ex-
ternal to the legislature for the revision of
that part of the constitution which pertains
to the legislature.
I recognize the problem that this may
be used for other areas. I am willing to
take that risk. I am willing to believe that
the legislature will respond in most in-
stances to the needs of the people for con-
stitutional change and constitutional re-
|
