|
Delegate Weidemeyer, these points that
you raise could be debated endlessly in the
legislature.
DELEGATE WEIDEMEYER: I think
you have adequately answered.
DELEGATE JAMES (presiding) : Dele-
gate Taylor.
DELEGATE L. TAYLOR: Delegate
Hardwicke, is there any way that you
could make this pension contributory in
this particular section, section 22?
DELEGATE HARDWICKE: Delegate
Taylor, I do not believe that we are ade-
quately equipped by reason of the testimony
and available evidence in front of us to
do it, and I do not think we should try to
do it, if we have to hope that the legisla-
ture will focus on the problem that you
see and change the figures so that would
be desirable. I do not think this Constitu-
tional Convention can give that much at-
tention to these details.
DELEGATE JAMES (presiding) : The
Chair will state that the problem is that
the judges do not serve long enough to
really develop a sound actuarial contribu-
tory plan. That is the problem that the
legislature runs into when this problem is
considered. The average judge serves ten
years. To have a contributory system
would make it almost prohibitive. That is
the problem.
DELEGATE L. TAYLOR: We have
about thirty thousand state employees.
Most of them, I believe all of them, con-
tribute to their pension plan. Some of them
may give service of ten or fifteen years.
They still have to contribute. Of course,
their salary may not be more than $5,000
or $6,000 dollars a year. Yet, they have to
contribute and a judge is receiving no less
than $22,000 a year. In the space of eight
or nine years he could contribute part of
his salary, I think.
DELEGATE JAMES (presiding) : Dele-
gate Hardwicke.
DELEGATE HARDWICKE: I under-
stand that. We understand the point you
are making, but I just have to repeat,
Delegate Taylor, I do not see how we are
equipped to do anything about it in this
schedule of legislation.
DELEGATE JAMES (presiding) : Dele-
gate Taylor.
DELEGATE L. TAYLOR: I feel that
the State should be democratic and treat all
state employees equally, and of course, this
is discrimination against other state em-
|
ployees. You pay one state employee a high
salary, and not require him to contribute
to his pension. This is really what you
would call an outright grant.
DELEGATE JAMES (presiding) : Dele-
gate Taylor, do you have a question?
DELEGATE L. TAYLOR: My question
is, are we going to be uniform in this con-
stitution? We should knock this section out
if we are, or at least make it a contribu-
tory pension for the ten years.
DELEGATE JAMES (presiding) : Dele-
gate Child.
DELEGATE CHILD: Delegate Hard-
wicke, I have a question on section 24.
As I understand the section as it is now
written here, a retired judge is receiving
a pension, we will say, which is less than
the maximum. That pension, although the
rate per year is increased under former
sections, remains the same in this case,
unless and until the legislature acts other-
wise. Do I understand the section correctly?
DELEGATE JAMES (presiding) : Dele-
gate Hardwicke.
DELEGATE HARDWICKE: You do,
Judge Child, yes.
DELEGATE JAMES (presiding) : Are
there any further questions?
Are there any further questions on sec-
tion 25?
(There was no response.)
If there are no further questions, we will
go to section 26. Are there any questions
on section 26? Section 27, Municipal
Courts, Baltimore City. Section 28. Section
29, vacancies in the Orphans' Court.
(There was no response on these
questions.)
Are there any further questions about
any section?
Delegate Hardwicke.
DELEGATE HARDWICKE: Section 30.
DELEGATE JAMES (presiding) : We
will have the judicial article before we pass
on to the local government. If there are no
further questions on the judicial article,
we will go to local government, section 30.
Are there any questions about section 30,
procedure to adopt a county instrument of
government?
Delegate Grant.
|
