clear space clear space clear space white space
A
 r c h i v e s   o f   M a r y l a n d   O n l i n e

PLEASE NOTE: The searchable text below was computer generated and may contain typographical errors. Numerical typos are particularly troubling. Click “View pdf” to see the original document.

  Maryland State Archives | Index | Help | Search
search for:
clear space
white space
Proceedings and Debates of the 1967 Constitutional Convention
Volume 104, Volume 1, Debates 296   View pdf image (33K)
 Jump to  
  << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>
clear space clear space clear space white space
296 CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION OF MARYLAND [Oct. 25]
not to defer formulation of their reports.
I suggest to you that if the Convention, as
is contemplated, adopts a motion at the
conclusion of the session on Thursday to
recess until Monday, you will have a long
weekend in which to diligently apply your-
selves to preparation of your minority
reports.
Are there any announcements by com-
mittee chairmen?
(There was no response.)
For what purpose does Delegate Wheat-
ley rise?
DELEGATE WHEATLEY: Mr. Presi-
dent, I have one possible correction for the
record. I am not sure whether I am correct,
but on Delegate Proposal No. 405, the Clerk
read line 8, as: "but not adapted to reflect
necessary differences." The "not" should be
omitted. If I am in error, this correction
would be unnecessary.
THE PRESIDENT: Delegate Proposal—
DELEGATE WHEATLEY: 405. The
tape will probably show this. If a correc-
tion is not in order, it will not be necessary,
but I think it is important that the record
show that.
THE PRESIDENT: If so, your state-
ment on the tape will take care of it.
DELEGATE WHEATLEY: Point of
parliamentary inquiry. Since committees
will be reporting out, as indicated today,
the question has arisen in our committee,
by members of the committee and staff, as
to a ruling that would affect the recall of
a committee report once it has been sub-
mitted to the floor, as one has been today.
We would like to get a ruling at this time
from the Chair, as to whether or not the
committee continues to exercise revisory
power, and if so, at what point does this
revisory power cease?
THE PRESIDENT: Answering you just
offhand and subject to correction on more
careful study of the rules, I would say that
the committee does not have revisory
powers. There is a provision in the rules
that the Committee of the Whole may not
re-refer a proposal to another committee.
However, this problem, or at least the
problem I think you have in mind, was dis-
cussed by the chairmen of the various com-
mittees, because they all recognize the
problems that would arise if amendments
were offered in the Committee of the Whole
to committee recommendations and sub-
mitted for debate without opportunity for
the committee to consider them again.
The answer to the problem seems to be
this. First off, there will not be, initially
at least, such a pressure on the order of
debate, as will make it impossible for the
committee members to confer among them-
selves as to an amendment being discussed
on the floor. In all probability, most of the
committee recommendations will embrace
much more than one section. It is the plan
to have these discussed in the Committee
of the Whole seriatim, so that as each
section is discussed and amendments to it
considered, it is not a final action on the
committee recommendation. Final action on
the committee recommendation would not
come until after all of the sections had
been discussed and amendments to it con-
sidered and acted upon seriatim. This
would afford an opportunity for the com-
mittee to consider any such amendments,
because as I am sure the delegate realizes,
the debates on any committee recommenda-
tion are apt to be a matter of days rather
than a matter of an hour or two.
In addition to this, the Committee on
Rules has under consideration, but has not
yet reported, a rule governing the making
of amendments. If what they are consider-
ing is adopted by that committee initially,
and by the Convention itself subsequently,
the probability is that there would be ample
time for a committee to consider any amend-
ments which might be offered, first because
most amendments would be printed and on
the desks of delegates before the debate on
the committee recommendation started, and.
secondly, because of the requirement that
amendments not so printed in advance must
be printed and on the desks of delegates be-
fore they can be voted on.
Your problem is one which has the con-
sideration of the Rules Committee, and I
think if you will wait until their report,
you will see much more clearly what the
answer will be.
DELEGATE WHEATLEY: Thank you,
Mr. President.
THE PRESIDENT: Delegate Johnson.
DELEGATE JOHNSON: Mr. President,
did I understand the Chair to recommend
that the majority report not be held up
while the minority report is being prepared?
THE PRESIDENT: I certainly do so
recommend and the reason I do is because
the indications which the Chair has re-
ceived from the committee chairmen is that
the committee reports will very shortly be
ready. They are to be accompanied by sup-
porting memoranda. These require study.


 
clear space
clear space
white space

Please view image to verify text. To report an error, please contact us.
Proceedings and Debates of the 1967 Constitutional Convention
Volume 104, Volume 1, Debates 296   View pdf image (33K)
 Jump to  
  << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>


This web site is presented for reference purposes under the doctrine of fair use. When this material is used, in whole or in part, proper citation and credit must be attributed to the Maryland State Archives. PLEASE NOTE: The site may contain material from other sources which may be under copyright. Rights assessment, and full originating source citation, is the responsibility of the user.


Tell Us What You Think About the Maryland State Archives Website!



An Archives of Maryland electronic publication.
For information contact mdlegal@mdarchives.state.md.us.

©Copyright  October 06, 2023
Maryland State Archives