will remind you that the Committee on
General Provisions last week reported on
the oath, after many hours of debate within
the Committee, and we were struck down
in a matter of two minutes.
The fact that these members of this Com-
mittee have worked long and hard on the
subject does not necessarily mean that this
should influence our vote, no more than my
coming from a large county should influence
my vote on this issue.
I do not choose at this moment to engage
Chairman Gallagher on the remarks con-
cerning work in the House, except to say
this: whereas it was true that Ways and
Means Judiciary had 70 percent of the
bills and the other committees had 30 per-
cent, I might point out that the 70 percent
constituted a great deal of paper which was
never passed upon, never acted upon,
whereas the 30 percent referred to minor
committees was all something of substance.
Ladies and gentlemen, to drop the House
from 142 to 108 is tantamount to tearing
it down. This would be a shock from which
Maryland would be a long, long time re-
covering. Perhaps the present House does
have too many members and too many com-
mittees, but the work of the House is such
that it needs at least 120 members. This
number would provide for a committee
structure of three to five major committees,
supported by a strong subcommittee struc-
ture and system.
Ladies and gentlemen of the Committee
of the Whole, I urge you to vote against
the 108 amendment and to give the people
of Maryland the minimum necessary for
fair representation, 120-40.
Thank you.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Gallagher,
the Chair will recognize you for the pur-
pose of yielding to a question from Delegate
Malkus, if you choose to yield.
DELEGATE GALLAGHER: I do, sir.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Malkus, do
you desire to put a question to Delegate
Gallagher?
DELEGATE MALKUS: Thank you, Mr.
Chairman.
The Chairman mentioned that it is hard
to have a workable committee divided like
Gaul into three parts if you have 120
members.
Is there anything wrong with the House
of Delegates having four committees, or |
even five committees? I mean, I just walked
over there to see where my friend Carlton
Sickles was and to see how our great body
worked over there in Washington, and for
some reason or other, Carlton is not here
this morning. I am sorry.
However, my question is serious, Mr.
Chairman. Why do we have to adhere to
three committees? Why can't we have four
or five? There is a lot of work to be done.
I really agree that the State of Maryland,
in the Senate, under the great leadership
of my Chairman, Mr. James, is working
well with three committees, but I also know
that the House of Delegates over the years
has worked very well — you ought to know
that — with more committees than the
Senate ever had. If we have a little larger
body in the House of Delegates, is it too
wrong to have more than three committees?
That is my question.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Gallagher.
DELEGATE GALLAGHER: Senator, I
do not think there is anything wrong in
having more than three committees, but I
do believe that when a representative comes
to Annapolis he ought to be on one of the
two, or as in the Senate, three major com-
mittees, because the people who elect the
representative are entitled to a voice in
these significant committees where, as you
know, the real work is done in the House.
When you have other committees beyond
the two or three, you get conflicting meet-
ing times. I remember serving on the Ju-
diciary Committee and the Motor Vehicles
Committee simultaneously, and I used to
have to ask the chairman of each commit-
tee when there was a conflict in the meeting
time — and there were many — if some-
thing important came up to please send for
me, so that I could vote.
I do not think that is the way we ought
to conduct the business of the House of
Delegates or the Senate. I believe that three
major committees in the Senate and three
in the House would be an excellent idea,
because it would expedite joint hearings on
major matters when experts and interested
parties come a long distance and enable
them to be heard once on a joint basis
rather than to force them to come back
another time. I think three major commit-
tees in the House, as the wisdom of the
Senate has already provided, would be an
ideal way to operate the General Assembly.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Malkus.
DELEGATE MALKUS: Mr. Chairman,
I guess my time is not already up. |
