|
DELEGATE HENDERSON: And "gov-
ernmental proceedings" do not include ju-
dicial proceedings. Is that your answer?
THE PRESIDENT: Delegate Willoner?
DELEGATE WILLONER: I have diffi-
culty in answering that question. I do not
understand it. If the legislature has the
power now to provide for opening up the
juries, and I frankly have not given it any
thought, then, I suppose, they would have
the power to do it under this section. This
is not to change any power they have. It is
to state the principle to be spelled out by
the legislature. If anybody thinks that the
legislature would extend it to jury proceed-
ings, it is just beyond belief, to me at least.
THE PRESIDENT: Delegate Case.
DELEGATE CASE: Well, will Delegate
Willoner yield to a question?
THE PRESIDENT: We have not been
observing the rules. Delegate Willoner has
already exhausted his trips to the floor. We
will give him one more. This will be it.
Delegate Willoner, do you yield to an-
other question?
DELEGATE WILLONER: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: Delegate Case.
DELEGATE CASE: Delegate Willoner,
what happens if the legislature does not
provide anything by law? Then what is
open?
THE PRESIDENT: Delegate Willoner.
DELEGATE WILLONER: The present
state of the law would be unchanged.
THE PRESIDENT: Delegate Case.
DELEGATE CASE: I am not sure it
would. I think this is subject to the in-
terpretation that everything would be
closed. If that is true, is your amendment
not defeating the whole purpose of what
you are trying to achieve?
THE PRESIDENT: Delegate Willoner.
DELEGATE WILLONER: It is not.
THE PRESIDENT: Any further dis-
cussion?
Delegate Dukes.
DELEGATE DUKES: When we dis-
cussed this matter earlier, the very point
that Delegate Case raised was raised at
the time as to whether or not the amend-
ment suggested by Delegate Weidemeyer,
substantially in the form as it now stands
|
as accepted by Delegate Willoner, would
not, in effect, say that only those items as
prescribed and defined by the legislature
would be open. If that is so, then the
present amendment suggested by Delegate
Willoner does away with the common law
right to public information and does a
whole lot more harm than what we had in
the first place.
Also, if I am not mistaken, I know that
Delegate Chabot and I argued, and if I
am not mistaken Delegate Willoner agreed,
either on the floor or back in the room,
with me. I sure hope he says something because I do not know how to vote.
DELEGATE PULLEN: Mr. Chairman,
I am not sure which side I am speaking
on. After I get through, I will give you
the privilege of deciding.
(Laughter.)
For thirty years I was either the deputy,
or the assistant, or the head of a state de-
partment. We not only gave notice of our
meetings, but we had visitors and we gave
notice to the newspaper people. The only
problem was misapprehension in some
cases. The main problem was to get the
newspaper people to listen to us long
enough to understand what we were talk-
ing about, and I suggest, sir, that we try
to bring this thing to a head and let all
public business be public property.
THE PRESIDENT: For what purpose
does Delegate Willoner rise?
DELEGATE WILLONER: In the light
of the discussion and the history that has
been made, I feel that I have no alternative
but to withdraw this particular amendment.
THE PRESIDENT: Amendment No. 12
is withdrawn.
The Chair has no other amendments to
Committee Recommendations R&P-1 and 2.
Are there any? If not, the Clerk will please
ring the quorum bell.
Delegate Stern.
DELEGATE STERN: I would like to
move for reconsideration of Amendment
No. 2 and hope that it can be done without
any debate.
THE PRESIDENT: The motion is to
reconsider the vote by which Amendment
No. 2 was rejected. Is there a second?
DELEGATE BOROM: Second.
THE PRESIDENT: The motion is
seconded.
|
