the Union have for a period of 130 to 140
years found the bicameral system quite
satisfactory.
I might point out here, too, that there
have been several occasions presented since
the Supreme Court decision in Baker v.
Carr, and Reynolds v. Sims, establishing
the one-man/one-vote principle, when State
constitutional conventions could have de-
parted from the bicameral General Assem-
bly and did not do so. We have before us
as documents provided for our study both
from the Constitutional Convention of the
State of New York, which may either be
ascending or descending at this very hour,
and the State Constitution of Rhode Island,
which also adopted a bicameral general as-
sembly, and bicameralism has prevailed
thus far, despite the one-man/one-vote
rule.
I would like now to move from a consid-
eration of section 3.01 to a consideration of
section 3.04, the composition of the legis-
lature. If you will indulge me, I would like
to read the precise language of the Com-
mittee recommendation.
"The number of members of each house
of the legislature shall be as prescribed
by law, but the number of Delegates shall
not exceed 105 and the number of Sena-
tors shall be one-third of the number of
Delegates. Each Delegate shall represent
one Delegate District, and each Senator
shall represent one Senate District. Each
Senate District shall be composed of
three whole Delegate Districts."
Within that single section 3.04 are sev-
eral subdivisions, all of which are equally
controversial, so I should like to address
myself to each of them.
In arriving in effect at the maximum
limitation of 35 Senators and 105 members
of the House, the Committee in actuality
settled on a compromise between 40 Sena-
tors and 80 Members of the House of Dele-
gates on the one hand, and 120 Delegates
and 40 Senators on the other. The Com-
mittee heard testimony at great length to
the effect that the present legislature, par-
ticularly the House of Delegates, with 142
members, was too large and cumbersome
and unwieldy to do an effective job of
legislating.
If one recognizes that the really impor-
tant committee work done in the General
Assembly, in the House of Delegates in
particular, is carried on in two major com-
mittees, the Ways and Means and the Ju-
diciary, and if one recognizes that it is |
virtually impossible to have more than 34
or 35 members on each of these committees,
it becomes perfectly apparent that only
about 70 members of the House of Dele-
gates are being fruitfully and fully used to
their full and utmost potential. And when
one addresses one's self to a question of
how large the House should be, recognizing
this difficulty, and taking into considera-
tion that perhaps the House could, if it so
desired, amend the committee structure so
as to provide a third significant substan-
tive committee, which one would presume
would not exceed 30 or 35, it appears quite
apparent that the most beneficial and fruit-
ful procedure and structure for the House
of Delegates would be three major commit-
tees of approximately 30 to 35. Moreover,
this would provide the rationale for setting
the limit of the number of members of the
House of Delegates at 105.
Certainly those of us who served in the
House when it was 123, much less than
those who serve in it at 142, are cognizant
of the fact that if one does not get an ap-
pointment to one or two major committees,
one feels that the time expended is not well
spent.
It may well be that the House, like the
Senate, could form a third significant com-
mittee, and consequently make use of up to
105 members in a full and satisfactory
fashion.
The adoption of 35 as the figure for the
Senate was also a compromise in the vari-
ous. packages which were presented to the
Committee. While it was generally agreed
that the old Senate of 29 was a little too
clubby, in the sense that one dealt on a
much more personal basis than one would
in a larger Senate of 43, it was felt by
those who testified and by the Committee
generally in its majority recommendation
that 35 would serve as an ideal number be-
cause of the happy proportion which is
provided on a three-to-one ratio.
Here we felt that the three-to-one ratio
was quite significant, and would provide,
as has been recommended by a great num-
ber of students of government, the best
possible correlation of House to Senate.
I might point out to the members of the
Committee of the Whole that an examina-
tion of the structure of both the House and
the Senate under all four Maryland Con-
stitutions, would show that never has the
State of Maryland through its Constitution
allowed the General Assembly to have
within its own hands the determination of
the ultimate numbers which would serve in |
