ture a division of responsibility, perhaps
exclusive, perhaps not. But I suggest it is
a thought we should all consider. I would
therefore, oppose the amendment. Thank
you.
THE CHAIRMAN: Does the delegate
desire to speak in favor? Delegate Marion.
DELEGATE MARION: Mr. Chairman,
with all due respect to the eminent Chair-
man of the Committee on the Legislative
Branch and to Delegate Schloeder, my
friend and colleague, I rise to speak in
favor of the amendment.
Delegate Schloeder and 1, when we were
campaigning together for election as dele-
gates to this Constitutional Convention had
occasion on many times to discuss this very
issue with groups of citizens whose votes
we were seeking. We came to speak on
opposite sides of the question even though
I began by feeling that 1 leaned toward bi-
cameralism. The more 1 discussed and de-
bated the issues, I came to realize that
logic should outweigh tradition.
Senator Norris back in Nebraska some
thirty-some years ago stated the case for
unicameralism there. He said this, "A state
should be a business institution and not a
political machine. Its government should
be conducted on business principles. It
should transact its business much as does
a great corporation with the governor as
the president, the legislature as the board
of directors, and the people as the stock-
holders."
I do not think any great one billion dol-
lar corporation would conceive of conduct-
ing its business, certainly not efficiently,
with a bicameral board of directors.
Delegate Scanlan quoted Mr. Justice
Holmes: "The life of the law is not logic
but experience". But what has been the ex-
perience of our state legislatures in too
many of the last years? About two years
ago. Newsweek Magazine referred to state
legislatures generally as the shame of the
states. It made the point that many citizens
had lost confidence in their state legis-
latures. They had given up on trying to
find out what went on in their state legis-
latures and became discouraged and pessi-
mistic about state governments for that
very reason.
I submit, Mr. Chairman, that a legis-
lature with a double image too often gives
citizens the idea it is all done with mirrors.
The argument is placed that there should
be checks and balances. 1 see in this argu- |
ment one which produces and encourages
irresponsibility, and despite Mr. Bradford
Jacobs' qualifications or lack of them as a
constitutional authority, his qualifications
as a political commentator are well-known.
He referred last Friday to the old An-
napolis shell game, a game where none can
tell from the outside who did what to whom,
let alone why.
Another commentator posed the problem
in this fashion: "It is common for the
members of one house to feel that if there
is any error or any bad feature in a bill
when it passes, the other house will surely
look out for it. Each depends on the other
and neither watches as closely as it should."
That remark was made by Governor
Norbeck of South Dakota fifty years ago
in urging that his State seriously consider
adopting the unicameral legislature. The
criticism he saw of the bicameral system
exists today.
Mr. Chairman, checks and balances would
be retained under a unicameral legislature.
There is the governor's veto. There is ju-
dicial review. There is the process of refer-
endum. But I think far more importantly,
there is public accountability clearly fo-
cused on legislative action. Because 1 be-
lieve that unicameralism and not bicam-
eralism would enhance prestige, create
visibility and focus responsibility, 1 be-
lieve it should be adopted here and now in
this State. We are creating a legislature
not for the legislators, but for the people
of Maryland.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Marion,
you have one-half minute.
DELEGATE MARION: With all due
respect to George Washington's teacup
theory, I would prefer to see us adopt the
Mug Theory. If we need to cool it, we exer-
cise a degree of responsibility and put it
down. Major change in the machinery of
state government requires courage. I urge
those people in this Convention who are
almost unicameralists to muster that cour-
age to shoulder the responsibility which we
would like to see exercised by our state
legislature, and vote favorably for Amend-
ment No. 1. Thank you.
THE CHAIRMAN: Does any delegate
desire to speak in opposition to the amend-
ment? Delegate E. J. Clarke.
DELEGATE E. CLARKE: Mr. Chair-
man, ladies and gentlemen of the Commit-
tee of the Whole, I rise in opposition to the
amendment. A great deal has been said
this afternoon about the pressures, influ- |
