|
DELEGATE JAMES (presiding): Do
we have copies of Amendment G to be
distributed? This will be Amendment No.
10, the amendment marked "G".
The Clerk will read the amendment.
READING CLERK: Amendment No. 10
to Committee Recommendations GP-7,
GP-8, GP-9, GP-9, GP-12, R&P-1, and
LB-3, as amended by Style Committee Re-
port S&D-17 by Delegate Weidemeyer:
On page 2, section 10.03, Constitutional
Convention in line 30 strike out the words
"on the question" and insert in lieu there-
of the words "at the election".
DELEGATE JAMES (presiding): Dele-
gate Weidemeyer.
DELEGATE WEIDEMEYER: Mr.
President and members of the Convention,
we have several methods now of calling a
constitutional convention. We are far more
liberal in the calling of a constitutional
convention than any of our previous Con-
stitutions, 1776, 1851, 1864, or 1867. We
now have, as you have it in 10.03, that the
legislature by a bare majority at any time
may call a constitutional convention.
Secondly, the legislature can submit it
to the people at any time for a vote.
Thirdly, if neither one of those procedures
has been followed and a constitutional
convention — or they have not taken the
sense of the people, within twenty years,
the legislature must. That is the third.
By and large if it is submitted to the
people we get away from our old pro-
visions, our time honored concepts, of
having a majority of the people vote at
the election to vote for it. You have in
here the words "with the majority of those
voting on the question". That means ex-
actly this; that if we have a general elec-
tion and 900,000 people vote for governor
but only 100,000 people vote on the ques-
tion of calling a constitutional convention,
50,002 votes would be a majority of that
100,000, and here a bare minority of this
State would be calling a constitutional con-
vention, to upset and disturb every basic
fundamental law we have enacted.
The words "at the election" or "at such
election" have been construed by numer-
ous courts as meaning a majority of the
votes cast at the election. For example, if
there were 900,000 voting for governor,
then if 450,000 or 451,000 would be a ma-
jority of those voting for governor, it
would seem to me that it is entirely rea-
sonable, before we disturb and try to fool
|
around with the basic law of our land,
that there should be a demand and a re-
quest by the majority of our citizens.
Otherwise, we are going to have minority
rule instead of majority rule. We will get
back to the days when they had three con-
stitutional conventions in 16 years. We had
one in 1851, one in 1864, and again one in
1867. Just imagine what that did to the
morale of the people of the State who did
not know from one day to the next wheth-
er their basic structure of law .was going
to be changed?
I say to you this: That if you have no
faith, if you have no faith in this docu-
ment we are writing, then you want to
leave this in here just as it is, so that any-
body at any time can come in and call a
constitutional convention. If you leave it
that way and there were only ten people
that voted on it and the rest aborted, those
people could call a constitutional conven-
tion.
If you have no faith in this document
you are writing today, leave it as it is;
but if you have faith in stability of gov-
ernment and also in this document you are
writing today you will adopt by amend-
ment, so that if it is submitted to the peo-
ple it must be then a majority of all the
people voting at the election, so that it
would give a true sense of the people as
to whether or not they want a convention
called and the basic document disturbed.
That, Mr. President, is the sum and sub-
stance of it. It takes out three words, puts
in three other words; but it will mean a
lot to the stability of the government of
the State of Maryland.
I ask you to adopt the amendment.
DELEGATE JAMES (presiding): Dele-
gate Gallagher.
DELEGATE GALLAGHER: I rise re-
spectfully to disagree with my amiable
and genial friend, Delegate Weidemeyer
of Anne Arundel County.
I submit to Delegate Weidemeyer that
if we elected members of the Senate and
House of Delegates in the same fashion
which he suggests, that if a governor got
500,000 votes, assuming that to be the
total number who voted for him in the
election, and a member of the House of
Delegates only got 245,000 votes, even
though he led the ticket, neither he nor
any of his compatriots would be elected to
the General Assembly; because if you use
the yardstick of the majority of those who
vote in an election, it may well be that no
|
