|
recall had some mention of the Chesapeake
Bay. Is that correct?
DELEGATE GALLAGHER: I cannot
quite remember the events of that hectic
evening, but I will rely upon your recol-
lection.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Carson.
DELEGATE CARSON: I recall that
they did.
The language you now have in two sen-
tences is: "Each congressional district shall
consist of adjoining territory and be com-
pact in form. Due regard shall be given to
natural boundaries and boundaries of po-
litical subdivisions."
May I ask you, in the light of that lan-
guage is it the intent of your Committee
that so far as the Eastern Shore is con-
cerned a congressional district would have
to go the northern route through Harford,
or would it be flexible and the General As-
sembly could also go the southern or
middle route if the election district had to
be expanded?
THE CHAIRMAN : Delegate Gallagher.
DELEGATE GALLAGHER: We do not
intend to impose any rigid, non-elastic
rules by virtue of the language that we
have used here with respect to the exact
land area. We think this is a situation
which is more legislative than constitu-
tional in nature. It would be up to the dis-
tricting commission and ultimately to the
General Assembly which has the last word.
You will note that in the congressional
districting section we do not provide that
the commission plan would become law in
the event that the General Assembly fails
to enact a new one.
We believe that the ultimate responsi-
bility must be upon the General Assembly
and no commission plan can automatically
become law unless it is specifically enacted
into law by the legislature itself.
THE CHAIRMAN: Is there any further
question, Delegate Carson?
DELEGATE CARSON: No, thank you,
Mr. Chairman.
THE CHAIRMAN: Are there any other
questions of the Committee Chairman?
Delegate Gallagher, the Chair has one
question in the light of your answer to the
question asked by Delegate Fox.
|
You indicated that if section 3.03 (b)
were deleted, section 3. 03 (e) could stand
alone, although somewhat shakily.
If that should happen, what would de-
termine, under 3. 03 (e), the year in which
congressional redistricting is to be effec-
tive? I am reading from lines 8 and 9.
DELEGATE GALLAGHER: I think,
Mr. Chairman, that that would depend
upon the will of the legislature as ex-
pressed in a resolution or some other in-
dication that they plan to take redistrict-
ing up. Perhaps it might also be a court
order to redistrict.
THE CHAIRMAN : It would not be con-
templated in that event that the commis-
sion could be a self-starter, so to speak?
DELEGATE GALLAGHER: No, sir. In
order to make it a self-starter, we would
have to provide additional language in
3.03 (e). It is interesting to note that prior
to Westbury v. Sanders, some states had
not redistricted for as long as 40 years.
Consequently, I think we would need more
than the language in 3. 03 (e) to make it a
self-starter.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Singer.
DELEGATE SINGER: I have one brief
question on the last sentence of 3.03 (d)
where you state that the standard should
be established immediately prior to state-
wide general election in 1972.
I was wondering why immediately and
not just prior. It seems to me this possibly
could be restrictive.
DELEGATE GALLAGHER: Well, we
wanted to catch the federal decennial sta-
tistics which will be available in December
of 1971. If any earlier figures were used
other than the federal decennial census fig-
ures, it would be most unfortunate, consid-
ering they would be at hand.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Gallagher,
I am not sure that you caught the full im-
port of Delegate Singer's question.
What would be meant by "immediately"?
Could it be as short as one day?
DELEGATE GALLAGHER: No, sir. It
would certainly have to be sufficiently in
time to take care of the primary election
as well as the general, because the would-
be candidates would want to know fairly
early where they stood. Since you do not
get the final federal figures on a census
tract basis until December of 1971, it
would seem to me that the commission
|
