|
The question arises on the adoption of
Amendment No. 3 to Committee Recom-
mendation GP-10.
A vote Aye is a vote in favor of Amend-
ment No. 3. A vote No is a vote against.
Cast your votes.
Has every delegate voted? Does any
delegate desire to change his vote?
(There was no response.)
The Clerk will record the vote.
There being 101 votes in the affirmative
and 2 in the negative, the motion carries.
The amendment is adopted.
Are there any further amendments to
Committee Recommendation GP-10?
(There was no response.)
THE CHAIRMAN: The question then
arises on the adoption of Committee Recom-
mendation GP-10.
Are you ready for the question?
(Call for the question.)
The question arises on the adoption of
Committee Recommendation GP-10 as
amended.
A vote Aye is a vote in favor of the
recommendation as amended. 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 89 votes in the affirmative
and 16 in the negative, the motion carries.
Committee Recommendation GP-10 as
amended is adopted.
The next item on the agenda is a con-
sideration of Committee Recommendation
GP-11.
The Chair recognizes Delegate Boyer.
DELEGATE BOYER: Mr. Chairman,
ladies and gentlemen, GP-11 deals with
separation of powers.
At the present time, the constitutions of
no fewer than forty states contain the
separation of powers requirement in one
form or another. The only states which do
not have such provision in their constitu-
tions are Alaska, Delaware, Hawaii, Kan-
|
sas, New York, North Dakota, Ohio, Penn-
sylvania, Washington, and Wisconsin. A
few states include this provision in their
Bill of Rights, and this occurred primarily
in the constitutions of the older states along
the eastern coast — Georgia, Maryland, Mas-
sachusetts, New Hampshire and North
Carolina.
In nearly all of the other states, the
clause is separately identified under the
head of "Distribution of Powers". Its spe-
cial importance is recognized by setting it
forth as one of the first articles of the con-
stitution preceding the articles which out-
line the establishment of the judicial, legis-
lative, and executive branches.
Cases decided by the Court of Appeals
under the separation of powers doctrine, as
set forth in Article 8 of our present Con-
stitution, illustrate that the inclusion of
this article in the Constitution has pre-
sented a useful defense against the im-
proper accumulation of power in any one
department of government.
Your Committee on General Provisions
had taken up this particular item recogniz-
ing that it had already been included under
Article 8 of the Declaration of Rights in
our Constitution of 1867, and recommends
for your consideration the reinclusion of it
in the present constitution. If it was good
then, it must be good now.
THE CHAIRMAN: Are there any ques-
tions of the Committee Chairman?
The Chair calls your attention to the fact
that this was a matter discussed to some
extent several days ago, or last week, in
connection with another committee recom-
mendation.
Delegate Carson.
DELEGATE CARSON: Chairman Boyer,
the last two words used are "judicial re-
view".
Do you mean by that that the require-
ment of judicial review could be satisfied
by merely having the court review a record
of the administrative agency? I assume
you do.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Boyer.
DELEGATE BOYER: Yes, under the
Administrative Procedure Act, Article 2 (b).
THE CHAIRMAN: Are there any other
questions ?
Delegate Willoner.
|
