|
DELEGATE JAMES (presiding): The
Clerk will read Amendment No. 2, desig-
nated "D", offered by Delegate Needle.
READING CLERK: Amendment No. 2
on Style, as amended by Report No. S&D-
17 to Committee Recommendations GP-7,
GP-8, GP-9, GP-12, R&P-1, and LB-3, on
second reading by Delegates Needle and
Winslow. On page 2, section 10.03, consti-
tutional convention, strike out all of lines 48
through 52, inclusive, and insert in lieu
thereof the following: "the constitution
shall be submitted to the voters of the
State for adoption, and shall be effective
only if approved by the affirmative vote of
a majority of those voting thereon."
DELEGATE JAMES (presiding): Dele-
gate Needle.
DELEGATE NEEDLE: Mr. Chairman, I
would like to have unanimous approval to
make one small amendment to the amend-
ment. The last word on line S, the word
"thereon" should be stricken and in lieu
thereof the words "on the proposal" be in-
serted, if you will, please.
DELEGATE JAMES (presiding): Would
you mind repeating that?
DELEGATE NEEDLE: Strike the last
word, "thereon", and insert in lieu thereof
the words "on the proposal."
Is there any objection to the amend-
ment ?
For what purpose does Delegate Weide-
meyer rise?
DELEGATE WEIDEMEYER: I would
like to ask Delegates Needle and Winslow
if they would accept an amendment to this
amendment striking out the word "thereon"
in line 8 of their amendment and inserting
in lieu thereof, "at the election."
DELEGATE JAMES (presiding): That
is a substantive change which the Chair
rules is out of order. This is strictly on
style.
Is there any objection to the change of
the word "thereon" to "on the proposal"?
(T Jt ere was no response.)
If not, the amendment will be considered
so modified.
Delegate Needle.
DELEGATE NEEDLE: This is an
amendment which would reinsert the origi-
nal language adopted by the Committee of
the Whole and would strike the amendment
language as suggested by the Committee
on Style, Drafting, and Arrangement.
|
As indicated by Delegate Penniman in
answer to a question which I put to him
just a short while ago, the Committee on
Style, Drafting and Arrangement has in-
corporated by reference a prior section by
virtue of this amendment, which is in vio-
lation, I believe, of its own Rule No. 4 with
regard to the style of our constitution.
It is difficult, at the outset, to understand
any section which refers to another, be-
cause it would be necessary to read the
other section referred to, in addition to
which, reading the preceding section to
determine exactly what this section means,
there are some doubts if the procedures
spelled out for the adoption of an amend-
ment to the constitution are in toto appli-
cable to the adoption of the product of
a constitutional convention. In addition,
should there ever be an amendment to the
preceding section, it could perhaps inad-
vertently amend this section. So it is quite
clear that the rules originally adopted by
the Style Committee were for good cause
and reason, and they should not be violated
by that Committee.
I therefore suggest that the original lan-
guage adopted by the Committee of the
Whole be reinserted and the style amend-
ment be deleted.
DELEGATE JAMES (presiding): Dele-
gate Penniman.
DELEGATE PENNIMAN: Delegate
Needle could have reduced the length of
his speech if I could just have signaled him
that I was going to give in. After that mas-
sive victory he had before I did not want
to contest this particular one, particularly
since we had violated our own rules as he
so extensively pointed out.
DELEGATE JAMES (presiding): Dele-
gate Marion.
DELEGATE MARION: May I address
a question to Delegate Boyer as Chairman
of the substantive committee who reported
this provision ?
DELEGATE JAMES (presiding): Will
Delegate Boyer yield ? Delegate Marion
wishes to submit a question.
DELEGATE BOYER: Yes, sir.
DELEGATE JAMES (presiding): Dele-
gate Marion.
DELEGATE MARION: When the lan-
guage in line 47 of section 10.03 was used
by your Committee, the language referring
to any proposal recommended by the con-
vention for changing the constitution, was
|