|
(Call for the question.)
The Clerk will ring the quorum bell.
The question arises on the adoption of
Amendment No. 11 to Committee Recom-
mendation as amended by Report S&D-8.
A vote Aye is a vote in favor of Amend-
ment No. 11. A vote No is a vote against
the amendment.
Cast your vote.
Has every delegate voted? Does any dele-
gate desire to change his vote?
(There was no response.)
Delegate James Clark.
DELEGATE J. CLARK: Delegate James
Clark votes No.
THE PRESIDENT: The Clerk will re-
cord the vote.
Delegate Kosakowski.
DELEGATE KOSAKOWSKI: I notice
that my red button went out again.
THE PRESIDENT: Just a minute. Is
Delegate Kosakowski recorded as voting
No?
READING CLERK: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: There being 35
votes in the affirmative and 80 in the nega-
tive, the amendment is lost and the amend-
ment is rejected.
Any other amendments to section 5.22?
The Chair hears none.
I am sorry. You have an Amendment O,
Delegate Willis. Do you desire to offer it.
DELEGATE WILLIS: Yes, please.
THE PRESIDENT: Will the pages
please distribute Amendment O?
The Clerk will read the amendment.
READING CLERK: Amendment No. 12,
to Committee Recommendation JB-1, as
amended by Report No. S&D-8, by Dele-
gates Willis and Stern:
On page 7, section 5.22, Judicial Term of
Office in line 22 strike out the words "his
appointment" and insert in lieu thereof the
following: "the occurrence of the vacancy
to which he was appointed".
THE PRESIDENT: The amendment
having been submitted by Delegate Willis,
is seconded by Delegate Stern.
The Chair recognizes Delegate Willis.
|
DELEGATE WILLIS: A very short ex-
planation, Mr. President. The language of
this report, section 5.22, indicates that a
judge after he is appointed would be up for
the next general election following the ex-
piration of two years from the date of his
appointment. The language in the present
Constitution deals with one year, but says
after the occurrence of the vacancy.
Now, there is quite a difference here. To
be specific, and to give an example, a va-
cancy could occur around the middle of
September. If the governor did not wish
to make an appointment until the middle of
November, then that judge would not be up
for election before the people for four
years. I think that is quite a while to give
him to serve before the people have a
chance to vote on his qualifications.
THE PRESIDENT: Any questions of
the sponsor? The Chair hears none.
Delegate Mudd.
DELEGATE MUDD: May I ask Dele-
gate Willis how he computed the possi-
bility of no election for four years?
DELEGATE WILLIS: As I understand
this, it says here that the continuance in
office of each judge shall be subject to ap-
proval or rejection at the next general elec-
tion following the expiration of two years
from the date of his appointment. His ap-
pointment could be delayed thirty days
after the vacancy occurs, or as much as
sixty days after the vacancy occurs.
Suppose the vacancy occurs on Septem-
ber 15. Sixty days later would be November
15. The general election would be over but
two years from that date the general elec-
tion could take place before November 15,
but he would not have been in office the full
two years. Therefore he would not be on
for another two years, and that is my
reasoning. If I am wrong I will stand
corrected.
THE PRESIDENT: Delegate Mudd, I
think that Delegate Willis's point could be
even more sharply illustrated if the va-
cancy occurred by reason of the expiration
of the term and if that coincided with the
election. If the appointment were one day
after, the next election following two years
thereafter could make it four years lack-
ing one day.
DELEGATE MUDD: I think I follow,
Mr. President and Delegate Willis. The
thought of our Committee, as I recollect it,
in using the word "appointment" rather
than "the occurrence of the vacancy" was
|
