handling regional problems in the legis-
lature in the unicameral legislature or bi-
cameral legislature.
DELEGATE HANSON: I think to that
question I would answer that I believe that
a delegation in a unicameral body would
be more effective than a bicameral delega-
tion in any given circumstance, whether
handling a regional problem or any other
kind of substantive problem, primarily be-
cause it would not be possible to shift re-
sponsibility for the action they took or rec-
ommend to the other branch.
I think those of us who have watched
our own legislative delegations from time
to time have been not too amused to find
that what looked like a great promise in
one house had been virtually by pre-
arrangement doomed to oblivion by the- ac-
tion of the other house, making it there-
fore quite difficult to know actually where
the axe had fallen and who actually was
responsible for the final result.
THE CHAIRMAN: Are there any
further questions of the minority spokes-
man? Delegate Gleason.
DELEGATE GLEASON: Mr. Chair-
man, I would like to ask the spokesman
for the minority if he would provide the
assembly with some kind of a figure as to
what would be the size of this unicameral
legislature.
DELEGATE HANSON: I have sug-
gested that if the Convention adopts our
proposal that there be a unicameral legis-
lature, that I would then propose an amend-
ment to section 3.04 to establish the size
of that body at one hundred.
We indicate this on page 1 of the mi-
nority report.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Gleason?
DELEGATE GLEASON: One hundred
would be 40 less than the 35-105 ratio and
I am wondering, how you would provide
for representation of minority groups in
the State with that kind of a figure?
DELEGATE HANSON: I think it
would be well to point out that minority
representation in the State is provided not
by the 35 figure, but by the 105 figure,
using single-member districts.
I think single-member districts are an
important and integral part of minority
representation, so my answer to you is that
minorities would be represented in the
same manner in a unicameral body as they
would be in a bicameral body. |
THE CHAIRMAN: Are there any
further questions of the minority spokes-
man?
Delegate Neilson.
DELEGATE NEILSON: Mr. Hanson,
from a practical standpoint as a spokes-
man for the minority party, what do you
think—
DELEGATE HANSON: Minority, not
minority party.
DELEGATE NEILSON:—what would
you think our chances would be if your re-
port were adopted in having the electorate
for the State of Maryland adopt this uni-
cameral form of legislature?
DELEGATE HANSON: As a practical
matter, I believe unicameralism could have
a very profound effect upon the electorate,
reviewing favorably the action of this Con-
vention. I say so because I believe that if
this Convention adopts unicameralism for
the reasons which we have given, namely,
that we are going to try to strengthen and
increase the effectiveness of the General
Assembly, and demonstrates, as I think it
can, that unicameralism is most material,
and perhaps the singlemost effective thing
that can be done to strengthen and make
the General Assembly more effective, that
the public generally will accept it, and ac-
cept it with enthusiasm.
Now, as Delegate Neilson well knows, I
have no. more empirical evidence on which
to base this argument than he or anyone
else has upon which to base an argument
that the people would throw up their hands
in horror at such a prospect.
THE CHAIRMAN: Are there any
further questions?
(There was no response.)
THE CHAIRMAN: If not, we will pro-
ceed to a consideration of section 3.01 for
the purposes of amendments.
While we are waiting for Delegate Han-
son to resume his seat, I would like to
recognize the presence in the rear balcony
of a delegation from Washington County,
one of whom I understand is Mrs. Mildred
Hyatt, former member of the House of
Delegates.
We are delighted to have you here.
(Applause.)
The Chair recognizes Delegate Hanson
for the purposes of submitting an amend-
ment to section 3.01. |
