Yesterday, in the invocation, the minister
referred to the difference between that
which ought to be and that which can be.
This is the problem we are facing now.
Politics, and that is what we are en-
gaging in, in the best sense of the term,
has been defined as the art of the possible.
The possible is that what we believe this
Convention must seek.
The majority report of the Committee,
on page 9, shows the apportionment of the
proposed 35-105 legislatures in the 1970s.
1 invite you to take a look at it. If you take
the legislature as apportioned on that sheet
you will find that 17 counties do not have
a senator they can call their own, and nine
counties do not even have a delegate they
can call their own. A delegate in 1970 will
represent 37,700 people, and the senators,
113,000 people.
The senate does not bother me so much
and it does not bother the other members
of the Minority so much; but the idea of
the House of Delegates does.
I might say that I am not now and
never have been a practicing member of a
political machine, nor do I come from a
county which is likely even in the distant
future to be without a delegate it can call
its own. But I do believe that the eight
counties on the Shore who do not have
population enough for five delegates under
the majority proposal are entitled to some
consideration.
Under the majority recommendation, in
1970 only seven political subdivisions of
this State will be represented by a man
they can call their own. On the projected
1970 population this figure will drop to
five subdivisions of the State, and every
delegate will represent nearly 45,000 people.
It is possible for us to do far better by
these people without compromising for all
time the principle of maintaining a limit
on the size of the house. As the Chairman
of our Committee said, most of the legis-
lators who appeared before us suggested
that the present size was about the top
limit of workability, even though it might
be a bit more efficient if it were reduced
somewhat.
An apportionment of 144 delegates as a
maximum can be made from 1970, which
will give each county at least a chance to
be represented. We have made a sample of
this kind of an apportionment, and it can
be done.
The majority proposal freezes every |
legislator into a little freedom with single
member districts for all. This minority be-
lieves that the legislature should have flexi-
bility in the years to come. Our amend-
ment offers alternative solutions and indeed
flexibility.
In 55 legislative bodies out of a total of
99 in the United States combinations of
single and multi-member districts are used.
Maryland could do so, too, and still reduce
the voter confusion which results from
long ballots.
The minority proposal also permits the
use of the slot system, a system which is
used in 18 bodies, mostly in the Southwest,
but including California, a system where
if there are three-member delegate districts,
a delegate can run for slot one, slot two,
or slot three, and the people can choose
their appointments from those slots.
The legislature might even use a system
which is in use in the lower house in Illi-
nois, that of cumulative voting, where if
there are three delegates running in your
district you may cast three votes for any
one of three persons, or you can pass two
for one and one for another. This is the
kind of a system that could help to assure
these small counties representation.
The Constitution which we are writing
here in Annapolis will not last unless it has
flexibility, but at the same time it will not
pass unless it offers representation.
A very few years before Maryland wrote
its first Constitution a ship called the
PEGGY STEWART was burned in the
Harbor of Annapolis on the question of
taxation without representation. I do not
suggest that we should go back to the
harbor and burn the MARYLAND LADY
on the question of small county representa-
tion.
I am not ashamed of compromise. Ed-
mund Burke, in his speech on the concilia-
tion of America said, "All governments,
indeed every human benefit and enjoyment,
every virtue and every prudent act, is
founded upon compromise."
This minority report and amendment
offers flexibility. The ratio between the
number of members in the House and that
in the Senate can be changed. Alternatives
in districting, and the hope of representa-
tion for diverse areas and communities of
interest are offered.
It offers a size which permits more lati-
tude than the limited numbers of the ma-
jority proposal. Yet it is smaller than the |
