One concerns the proposition that Dele-
gate Hanson put so plainly this morning;
that is, that if you live on this side of the
street when you go to vote, your vote is for
a full delegate, and if you live on the other
side of the street, your vote is for a half-
delegate. The other thing that is bothering
me is that after you get these people into
the House, how would they be assigned to
committees and how would they vote in the
committees?
I will be glad to release my time to who-
ever would want to address himself to the
problem, either Delegate Grant or Delegate
Adkins, or Delegate Hostetter.
THE CHAIRMAN: Does any delegate
desire to speak in opposition?
(There was no response.)
Does any other delegate desire to speak
in favor?
Delegate Koss?
DELEGATE KOSS: I rise to ask a ques-
tion. I do not want to take any time away
from anyone.
THE CHAIRMAN: Let me find out if
anybody desires to speak either in favor or
in opposition.
Does anybody desire to answer Delegate
Rybczynski's question?
The Chair recognizes Delegate Koss.
DELEGATE KOSS: I would like to ask
a question of Chairman Gallagher, who has
so clearly explained what the effect of frac-
tional voting would be in terms of the size
of a House of Delegates, that is, in terms
of adding three to the House of Delegates
and the necessity of adding another mem-
ber to the Senate.
I wonder if he could answer my question
in terms of projected population growth
and the fact that the experience of the
small counties in the past has been that
they grow as a slower rate than the large
counties. Am I correct in assuming that in
the future, the number that these frac-
tional votes might add up to in terms of
their percentage of the total, would prob-
ably be less than the six per cent, say, at
some point three? Does this mean that you
would have to increase the size of the
House by six, and the size of the Senate by
two, and is this not in fact then a removal
of the limitation on the size of the General
Assembly?
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Gallagher?
DELEGATE GALLAGHER: I think the |
amendment is hinged on providing a certain
number of votes, and that the control vote
is the vote in the House of Delegates, so
you must determine how many people it
will take to provide you with 120 votes.
Now, that number may grow larger over
the years, if some of the counties do not
grow as fast as other areas, so that it
could be that it would take 130 warm
bodies to cast 120 votes.
I guess theoretically if the number of
subdivisions in Maryland stays at 29, that
it might be after a while that the number
could theoretically go up to 12 or 15, I
suppose.
Then, having determined what the num-
ber of the House of Delegates is to cast
120 votes, you apply your one-third figure
to the Senate to produce that number of
corresponding bodies to keep your ratio
where it is supposed to be. To provide the
same number of votes you need a certain
number of bodies, so it works in a not very
simple way, as far as I am able to see.
I do not want you to feel that in my
answer I am in any way discouraging this
approach.
THE CHAIRMAN: Is there any further
debate?
Delegate Chabot?
DELEGATE CHABOT: Would Mr. Gal-
lagher yield for another question on this
same line?
THE CHAIRMAN: Does Delegate Gal-
lagher yield to a question?
DELEGATE GALLAGHER: Yes, I will.
DELEGATE CHABOT: I noticed that in
describing the fractions of the vote that
each of the counties would have, you indi-
cated that each county would have a whole
number of tenths of votes. Is there any-
thing in the language before us that would
authorize stopping the fractional computa-
tion at one decimal place?
DELEGATE GALLAGHER: No.
THE CHAIRMAN: Delegate Gallagher.
DELEGATE GALLAGHER: No. As a
matter of fact, Wicomico under the projec-
tion has actually one full delegate in 1970,
and an additional eight-tenths delegate, so
you would have a first class, Class A, dele-
gate and a Class B delegate from Wicom-
ico. That is the reason.
Wicomico is the reason I think that the
original language on line 28 had the sen- |
