It is time we found out that the facts of
life, as they exist in political life, are
really there for anybody to see who will
count the votes the day of the primary and
see how those who were elected won.
That is how they got in.
THE CHAIRMAN: The Chair is not
deaf, but assumes that Delegate Sherbow
was speaking in favor of the Rybczynski
amendment.
DELEGATE SHERBOW: I announced
it at the beginning, did I not, because I
thought Mr. Lord had abandoned support
for his own amendment.
THE CHAIRMAN: I have no objection,
I just want to give the opportunity to op-
ponents to speak following you. Does any-
one desire to speak in opposition to the
Rybczynski amendment?
Delegate Marion.
DELEGATE MARION: Mr. Chairman,
and ladies and gentlemen, I am compelled
to rise because of what the last speaker
just said.
I think we should all recognize it and
recognize it very clearly. I am a member
of a political party, but the reason, one of
the basic reasons why the election is won
in Baltimore City in the primary is be-
cause of multi-member districts in Balti-
more City.
The interests of the minority political
party are submerged and can be submerged
and will always be submerged as long as
multi-member districts are tolerated.
I think most of the other arguments have
been said, Mr. Chairman. Let me just say
this, in closing:
The word parochialism has been used
here with a certain insidious flare to it,
but what we are talking about, when we
talk about single-member districts and
parochialism is the reduction of represen-
tative democracy to the lowest common
denominator, to get government, as we said
time and time again yesterday and the day
before, as close to the people who are being
represented as it is possible to do.
I urge this body to vote against the
amendment to the amendment, to vote
against the amendment, to support the
Committee, and to favor single-member
districts.
THE CHAIRMAN: Does any other dele-
gate desire to speak in favor of the amend-
ment?
Delegate Sosnowski. |
DELEGATE SOSNOWSKI: Mr. Chair-
man, I would like to speak in favor of the
Rybczynski amendment.
I am strongly opposed to single-member
districts in both houses of the legislature.
The most attractive and well thought out
theory in the world is valid only if it works
when put into practice, and it is my feeling
that when the field of single-member dis-
tricts and sharpened lines of legislative
responsibility is put into practice it will
prove to be invalid. The single-member
legislative district will tend to produce little
political kingdoms and a parochial General
Assembly.
A legislature composed of law-makers,
each from a tiny political enclave, will in-
crease parochialism, provincialism, and in-
crease unanimity to such a degree that the
passage of progressive legislation will be
extremely difficult. Because of the limited
geographical area and smaller population
each legislator will represent in a single-
member district, he will probably feel less
free to vote his conscience on matters of
general public concern.
The viewing of each little kingdom for
construction of public facilities will tend to
produce log rolling the likes of which have
never been witnessed in a legislative body
before.
By no means am l in favor of abolishing
all parochialism in the legislature. A degree
of parochialism is healthy and necessary to
give voice to different philosophies and
needs on a factional or sectional basis.
However, by virtue of single-member dis-
trict representation, such parochialism is
already present in one house of the legisla-
ture, the Senate.
The multi-membership districts in the
House of Delegates allow an overall ma-
jority to be exercised, thus contributing a
necessary balance to the legislature.
The existence of a bicameral or two-
house legislature affords the framework for
a balanced legislature, whereby one house
is elected on a single member district basis
and the other house is elected on a multi-
member district basis.
When the existing bicameral framework
is used in this manner to create a balanced
legislative body, the people are assured of
representation which can best serve the
welfare of each and all.
THE CHAIRMAN: Does any other dele- |
