|
a member of the General Assembly from
being elected; but he cannot merely be
appointed. We differ from the old Consti-
tution in the sense that in the new consti-
tutional language a man can be elected to
an office which was created during his
term, or the salary of which was raised
during his term, that is line. He simply
cannot be appointed.
THE PRESIDENT: Delegate Case.
DELEGATE CASE: Would Delegate
Gallagher yield for a question?
THE PRESIDENT: Delegate Gallagher?
DELEGATE GALLAGHER: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: Delegate Case.
DELEGATE CASE: Delegate Gallagher,
so that I can clearly understand the intent
of your Committee let me put this hypo-
thetical situation to you:
Suppose Mr. X is elected to the House
of Delegates and after one year of serv-
ice for reasons best known to him he
resigns. Then three years later, or at the
end of that term while he is back in private
employment, the General Assembly creates
an office. It is the intention of your Com-
mittee to preclude that particular resigned
delegate from being able to be appointed
to that particular office?
THE PRESIDENT: Delegate Gallagher.
DELEGATE GALLAGHER: If the ap-
pointment would take place during a period
of time that he would have served had he
not resigned, then he is prohibited from
being appointed to the position.
THE PRESIDENT: Delegate Case. Is
it the appointment or the creation of the
office? That is the thing that gets me a
little bit.
THE PRESIDENT: Delegate Gallagher.
DELEGATE GALLAGHER: It is the
intention of the Committee to preclude any-
one who was elected to an office, regardless
of when he resigned and regardless of
when within the four year term the office
was created or salary of which was in-
creased. It is the intention of the Com-
mittee to prohibit him during that same
four year period from ever being appointed
to an office which was created or salary of
which was increased.
THE PRESIDENT: Delegate Case.
DELEGATE CASE: Chairman Gal-
lagher, not that I am disagreeing with
|
you, but does this go further than the
philosophy of General Provisions found in
the constitutions across the country on
this? The prohibition seeks to strike at
people who participate in the creation of
offices and then resign and get the benefit
of their creating ability, whereas in the
case we have been discussing, of course,
the prospective candidate would not have
had any, or played any part in the creation
of the office, yet he still nontheless would
be barred from accepting appointment to
that office.
THE PRESIDENT: Delegate Gallagher.
DELEGATE GALLAGHER: Of course
a member of the General Assembly who
decided he had a good opportunity to fill
an office which was about to be created by
the General Assembly, could simply resign
the day before the office was created and
say, "I was not there to vote upon the
creation of the office, and therefore I ought
to be allowed to be appointed to the office."
I think in order to take care of the situa-
tion generally you have to have a general
prohibition.
Some people may have resigned in good
faith and had nothing to do with the crea-
tion of the office because it occurred after
they left, or they may actually have been
parties to all the pre-final determinate
activity that goes on in a General As-
sembly.
DELEGATE CASE: Sort of occupa-
tional hazards of being a member of the
General Assembly, would you say?
THE PRESIDENT: Delegate Gallagher.
DELEGATE GALLAGHER: It is part
of the glory of the office, yes.
THE PRESIDENT: Delegate James.
DELEGATE JAMES: Another one of
the burdens we must bear.
Mr. Chairman, I would like to pose a
question to Delegate Gallagher.
THE PRESIDENT: Does Delegate
Gallagher yield to a further question?
DELEGATE GALLAGHER: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: Delegate James.
DELEGATE JAMES: How does this
affect judicially ambitious legislators? In
the past the system has been to pass a
constitutional amendment and put a
savings clause in the constitutional amend-
ment. Not having any judicial ambitions,
I am not particularly interested myself,
|
