|
actuality this is a somewhat better ar-
rangement than the prior language because
you will only have ten-year intervals in-
stead of twelve and eight-year intervals.
THE PRESIDENT: Are there any ques-
tions of the sponsor of the amendment?
The Chair hears none. Is there any dis-
cussion? Delegate Rybczynski.
DELEGATE RYBCZYNSKI: Mr. Presi-
dent, the way I understand the amendment,
it looks like two clearly different questions.
I would move for separation or division.
THE PRESIDENT: I do not think it is,
Delegate Rybczynski. I can see that the
two questions could be presented differ-
ently, but the first part of the amendment
is to strike out all of the lines — I see what
you mean. The Chair rules it is divisible.
The first question will be on the portion of
the amendment in lines 1 to 5 and the sec-
ond question will be on the portion in lines
7 to S. The Chair makes the ruling on the
assumption that each of the parts of the
amendment can stand independently of the
other. In other words, that if the first
amendment does not carry, you would have
a situation in which the section would read
"boundaries and districts shall be with-
drawn according to each standard, accord-
ing to the general election in 1970 and
every twentieth year thereafter and prior
to the general election in 1982 and every
tenth year thereafter." There is no in-
consistency in that. The division stands.
Delegate Gallagher, do you follow my com-
ment?
DELEGATE GALLAGHER: I do, Mr.
President, but I do think it presents a cer-
tain problem.
THE PRESIDENT: I realize it presents
a problem, but it could stand that way?
DELEGATE GALLAGHER: It is possi-
ble for them to stand that way. I will leave
the question of wisdom up to the floor as
we reach each problem. I will take it one
at a time.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well. The
question will be divided. The first portion
of the question will be lines 1 to 5. Second
portion lines 7 to 8. Is there any discus-
sion?
Delegate Marion.
DELEGATE MARION: May I address
a question to Chairman Gallagher, please
sir?
THE PRESIDENT: Do you take the floor
to yield to a question?
DELEGATE GALLAGHER: Yes, sir.
|
THE PRESIDENT: Delegate Marion.
DELEGATE MARION: If both portions
of this amendment are adopted, would it
be your intention that every ten years
after 1982, even in those years in which
there is no general election for the election
of state officials in Maryland, for instance,
1992 and 2012, that the language of this
section would apply as to the redrawing of
the boundaries of districts ? The effect of
the sections dealing with the redistricting
commission and when it would take effect
and when it would have to have its recom-
mendations into the General Assembly and
so on would also apply?
THE PRESIDENT: Delegate Gallagher.
DELEGATE GALLAGHER: Excuse me
one second.
The answer is yes. In other words, it
would be 1982, 1992, 2002, regularly all the
way through.
THE PRESIDENT: Delegate Marion.
DELEGATE MARION: There would be
some occasions when the redistricting
would, by the constitution, have to take
effect in a year in which no election was
to be held.
THE PRESIDENT: Delegate Gallagher.
DELEGATE GALLAGHER: That is cor-
rect.
THE PRESIDENT: Is there any further
discussion ?
Delegate Schneider.
DELEGATE SCHNEIDER: Could I ask
Delegate Gallagher a question ?
THE PRESIDENT: Delegate Gallagher,
do you yield to a question?
DELEGATE GALLAGHER: Yes, sir.
DELEGATE SCHNEIDER: Delegate
Gallagher, have you considered the possi-
bility of the transitional legislation being
knocked out by the legislature resulting in
no reapportionment or no redrawing of dis-
trict lines until 1982?
THE PRESIDENT: Delegate Gallagher.
DELEGATE GALLAGHER: The Gen-
eral Assembly does not have the power to
knock out the transitional legislation. It
can only be done by way of constitutional
amendment, as I understand it.
THE PRESIDENT: I think it would be
inaccurate to say transitional legislation.
Transitional provisions.
|
