DELEGATE HANSON: Mr. Chairman,
I submit the following amendment.
THE CHAIRMAN: Will you send it
forward, please?
The Clerk will read the amendment. It
will be marked Amendment No. 1. Please
strike out the printed language to Amend-
ment No. 1 so that it will read "Amend-
ment No. 1 to Committee Recommendation
No. LB-I."
READING CLERK: Amendment No. I
to Committee Recommendation No. LB-I,
by Delegates Hanson, Miller, Sollins and
Gill: On page 1 of Committee Recommenda-
tion LB-I, strike all of Section 3.01. Legis-
lative Power and insert in lieu thereof the
following section:
"Section 3.01. Legislative Power
The legislative power of the State is
vested in the General Assembly, which
shall consist of one house."
THE CHAIRMAN: Is there a second to
the amendment?
(Whereupon, the amendment was sec-
onded.)
THE CHAIRMAN: Amendment No. I
to Committee Recommendation LB-I is now
before you. The debate on this section is
controlled under Debate Schedule 1. There
are 45 minutes allocated to Delegate Han-
son and to such persons as he may desig-
nate and 45 minutes to Delegate Gallagher,
after which there are 45 minutes of un-
controlled debate.
The Chair recognizes Delegate Hanson.
DELEGATE HANSON: Mr. Chairman,
fellow delegates, what does it state in this
amendment? It states whether or not the
legislative branch in Maryland is going
to be co-equal with the other branches of
the Government, and whether it is going
to be effective and responsible. As I indi-
cated a few moments ago, we believe that
to have a strong and effective legislature,
we must be able to make it possible for it
to unite in its confrontation with the gov-
ernor; that it must have the ability to at-
tract outstanding citizens of public service
in the legislature; that it must be a body
in which the public has confidence; that
the public business will be transacted in
full view, and that each member will act
responsibly; that it must be accountable
to the electorate and it must have high
visibility.
The argument has been made that other
states have not adopted a unicameral sys- |
tem. To that I would reply that one of the
great tragedies in state government is the
propensity of each state to accept without
criticism or question the errors of its
sisters.
We are here assembled in a Constitu-
tional Convention, in which we are going to
be doing a good bit of innovating and de-
veloping a good bit of new approaches to
state government. Had this argument pre-
vailed in the Missouri Constitutional Con-
vention not too long ago, there would never
have been a Missouri plan for establish-
ment of the judiciary. No state had ever
done it. Had it prevailed—correction, not
Missouri, New Jersey—had such an argu-
ment that no other state had done it be-
fore prevailed, there would be no unified
court system and no unified executive in
New Jersey. So, Mr. Chairman, I think our
job here is not to be concerned with what
others have done, but to be concerned with
what we need to do to establish a strong
and effective Constitution and to make as a
citadel for the people in that Constitution
a strong and effective legislature.
Mr. Chairman, I should like to yield
five minutes to Delegate Sollins.
THE CHAIRMAN: The Chair recog-
nizes Delegate Gallagher in opposition to
Amendment No. 1.
DELEGATE GALLAGHER: Mr. Chair-
man, ladies and gentlemen of the Commit-
tee of the Whole, I rise to speak in opposi-
tion to the amendment offered by Delegate
Hanson.
I believe it is only fair to say that the
shortcomings which he has described in his
attack on bicameralism are not due to the
nature of bicameralism itself, but some of
the other failures to which I made refer-
ence in the presentation of the committee
report.
I would suggest, for example, that the
last-minute rush of bills is not due to bi-
cameralism but rather to the limited ses-
sions and the unrealistic limitations that
are placed upon the number of days dur-
ing which a General Assembly has to act.
It is perfectly possible, I would suggest,
to the Chair and to the members of the
Committee of the Whole, that bicameralism
could be adopted in such a manner as to
provide sufficient time to eliminate the rush
of bills. I would also point out to the mem-
bers of the Committee of the Whole that
because of the provision that none of the
money bills can move until the budget bill
has been passed, there is a natural tie-up |
