|
before. If the legislature extended its ses-
sion to 150 days and had not enacted the
budget bill by the 140 days the Governor
was mandated to extend the session for
at least twenty days or ten days beyond
150, and by the change this does not occur.
The Governor is not under any circum-
stances required to continue the session be-
yond 150 days. Do you follow the point?
My statement was that the change made
by the Committee on Style is in conformity
with what the Committee on the Legisla-
tive Branch and the Committee of the
Whole intended.
Delegate Gallagher.
DELEGATE GALLAGHER: Yes, sir.
We discussed this over the last several days
and I had told my staff advisors that this
change was consistent with the intention
of the Committee of the Whole.
THE PRESIDENT: Are there any fur-
ther questions? Are there any further
questions as to Article G, that is.
Delegate Sybert.
DELEGATE SYBERT: Mr. Chairman,
is page 41 and page 42 one of the ones to
be reprinted? I find that my second page
42 is missing.
THE PRESIDENT: No, it is not. I will
see that is done.
Delegate Penniman.
DELEGATE PENNIMAN: On page 41
there is a misspelling of the word "appro-
priation" on line 50.
THE PRESIDENT: The obvious typo-
graphical error will be corrected.
Are there any further questions as to
Article 6?
The Chair hears none.
We will proceed to Article 7.
DELEGATE PENNIMAN: In Article
7, no change in 7.01, none in 7.02.
A "prescribed" for "provided" in line 33
of 7.03. We made "amendment" singular.
Also "may", we changed the order of words.
We changed "provide" to "prescribed".
Section 7.04, no change.
Section 7.05, we changed "provide" to
"prescribe" on line 18. The position of the
word "may" is shifted on line 26 in section
7.06.
THE PRESIDENT: Delegate Penniman,
will you pause just a moment?
|
DELEGATE PENNIMAN: Yes, sir.
THE PRESIDENT: I was bothered
earlier and something interrupted me at
the time with respect to one of these "pro-
vided" and "prescribe" changes in connec-
tion with rules by the courts. I do not re-
member what section it was.
DELEGATE PENNIMAN: What that
Article 5?
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, I think.
DELEGATE CLAGETT: Section 7.03,
line 33?
THE PRESIDENT: No, that is not the
one I am thinking of. Where is the section
about the power of the courts to prescribe
rules?
DELEGATE PENNIMAN: 5.03. May
we go back for a moment to section 5.03,
page 28. I am a little concerned about the
changes made there and I am not sure
that they were mentioned. In lines 30 and
32 change the word "prescribe" to "provide".
THE PRESIDENT: I suppose the word
"for" was added.
DELEGATE PENNIMAN: No, the word
"for" was there.
THE PRESIDENT: I suggest that there
is a garble in the sentence.
DELEGATE PENNIMAN: I agree to
that. I should have called it to your atten-
tion because we looked at it because we did
not know what it meant and we did not
have someone from judiciary who wanted
to assert what it meant.
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. William H.
Adkins, Advisor to the Committee on the
Judicial Branch, I think there is a garble
in section 5.03. So we can save time, would
you undertake to look at the earlier drafts
and see if it can be picked up while Ave
move ahead? Thank you.
Proceed now with Article 7.
DELEGATE PENNIMAN: In 7.04, no
change.
In 7.05, a change from "provide" to
"prescribe".
7.06, change of the location of the word
"may". Put it together with the verb.
Line 29, change "provide" to "prescribe".
No change in 7.07.
None in 7.08.
None in 7.09.
None in 7.10.
|
